 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Massam v. Massam, Case Nos. 2D05-1997, 2D05-2827 CONSOLIDATED,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, SECOND DISTRICT, January 23, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court properly required a husband to maintain a life insurance policy in order to secure the wife's alimony award under § 61.08(3), Fla. Stat. (2004), based on her limited earning ability and the likelihood of arrears due to his financial misconduct; however, the trial court erred in failing to make specific findings supporting the order.
|
|||||
| Navarro v. State, No. 3D07-2953,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, January 23, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Neals v. State, No. 3D06-2076,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, January 23, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not abuse its discretion by limiting cross-examination of detective about other crimes that occurred after defendant was arrested for burglary; defense counsel failed to establish relevance of evidence, the evidence did not qualify as reverse Williams rule evidence, and the evidence was inadmissible hearsay.
|
|||||
| Ojurongbe v. State, No. 3D07-1537,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, January 23, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the question of whether defendant's failure to list a 1989 Florida drug conviction based on the entry of a plea on his application for an immigrant visa was for the immigration courts, and not a Florida trial court to decide, the trial court erred in denying his Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850 motion to vacate said conviction.
|
|||||
| Pena v. Tampa Maid Foods, Inc., CASE NO. 1D07-4535,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, January 23, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Perez v. Perez, Nos. 4D06-4036 & 4D06-4327,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, January 23, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As a former husband offered evidence to show that his income had been severely reduced for almost a year, a trial court's "directed verdict" in favor of the former wife in the husband's motion to modify his child support and alimony obligations under § 61.14(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2006) was an abuse of discretion.
|
|||||
| Phillips v. State, CASE NO. 1D07-2916,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT, January 23, 2008, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Ponce v. U-Haul Co., No. 4D06-4570,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, January 23, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Ramkhalawan v. State, No. 4D06-1046,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, January 23, 2008, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction on three counts of capital sexual battery was affirmed; while victim's third statement to authorities recanted claims defendant abused her, her trial testimony was consistent with guilt, and explanation that family pressure led her to recant was confirmed by letter from her father, which was properly admitted into evidence.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
