 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Chapinoff v. State, No. 3D06-2936,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, February 11, 2009, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Convictions were reversed based on U.S. Const. amend. V double jeopardy violation because attorneys' misconduct did not create "manifest necessity" for discharging jury, trial court fatally failed to consider all reasonable alternatives, and defense counsel's motion for mistrial was not voluntary relinquishment of defendant's right to proceed.
|
|||||
| Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Cuban-Hebrew Congregation of Miami, Inc., No. 3D08-1325,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, February 11, 2009, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in requiring insurer to pay full amount of damage appraisal without subtracting a deductible and sums already paid on a loss; those issues were not submitted to the appraisers, who were charged only with determining amount of loss, and under Meade, subtraction of the deductible and sums paid from the appraisal was proper.
|
|||||
| Clemmons v. State, No. 4D08-4486,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 11, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Cocco v. Pritcher, No. 4D08-1083,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 11, 2009, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Drak, L.L.C. v. Salcines Dev., Inc., No. 3D08-3027,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, February 11, 2009, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| E.A.D. v. State, Case No.2D08-814,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, SECOND DISTRICT, February 11, 2009, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Espinoza v. State, Case No. 2D08-690,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, SECOND DISTRICT, February 11, 2009, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Estate of Shefner v. Shefner-Holden, No. 3D07-1890,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, February 11, 2009, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of motion of son and daughter of a decedent for attorney's fees and costs for defending Slayer Statute claim asserted by sisters was error because, as a result of the defense of the claim, the terms of the decedent's will were upheld, and, thus, under § 733.106(3), Fla. Stat., the son and the daughter were entitled to reimbursement.
|
|||||
| Extraordinary Title Servs., LLC v. Fla. Power & Light Co., No. 3D08-155,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, February 11, 2009, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Account holder did not state claim against electric company and parent company about tax money retention; alleged violation of Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices, § 501.212(5), Fla. Stat. did not apply to state public service commission regulated activity and necessary direct benefit was not conferred upon them to show unjust enrichment.
|
|||||
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. |
