 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Gilbert v. Storey, CASE NO. 3D05-1244,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, February 15, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Leaving papers with quiet title defendant's mother-in-law, after being repeatedly told that defendant no longer lived there, did not constitute service under Fla. Stat. § 48.031(1)(a), and did not start the 20-day time limit of Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.140(a)(1) running. Therefore, default should not have been entered.
|
|||||
| Golden Yachts, Inc. v. Hall, Nos. 4D04-1945 and 4D04-4269,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 15, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a negligence action against a boat sales company, the trial court properly admitted evidence that the company had lost component parts and provided the wrong H-frames for inspection and testing and properly gave an adverse inference instruction to the jury. The evidence showed that the these items were last in the company's possession.
|
|||||
| Guzman v. State, CASE NO. 3D03-3085,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, February 15, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions and sentences related to battery, robbery, and carjacking were upheld because trial court did not commit manifest error in determining that a prospective juror was competent to serve as a juror, as prospective juror's statements revealed nothing more than an inclination toward law enforcement work and upholding of the law.
|
|||||
| Hernandez v. Hernandez, Case No. 2D04-5500,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, SECOND DISTRICT, February 15, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an appellate court relinquished jurisdiction to trial court for express purpose of setting temporary child support pending review on appeal, trial court acted outside its jurisdiction by reversing its permanent child support order. That later order was void, despite fact that trial court properly recognized error in its original order.
|
|||||
| Hollander v. State, No. 4D05-2189,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 15, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because defendant claimed that his counsel failed to convey the State's plea offer to him, that he would have never entered his plea had he been informed of the offer, and that he would have accepted a lighter two-year sentence, defendant made a facially sufficient claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
|
|||||
| Howard v. State, No. 4D05-975,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 15, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Hylton v. State, CASE NO. 3D05-1570,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, February 15, 2006, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| J.D. v. State, No. 4D05-337,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 15, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In the absence of evidence that the victim was employed by the Florida Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ), employed at a facility licensed by the DJJ, or employed at a facility operated under a contract with the DJJ, a juvenile defendant's conviction for assault and battery under Fla. Stat. § 784.075 (2003) could not stand.
|
|||||
| J.T. v. State, No. 4D04-4195,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 15, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
