 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Cedillo v. State, No. 4D05-804,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the State made an accusatory implication established by a detective's hearsay testimony a significant feature of the trial in order to link defendant to the crime by having the detective testify as to the victim identifying defendant, in violation of § 90.801(1)(c), Fla. Stat., defendant's convictions were reversed.
|
|||||
| Cutler v. Cutler, No. 3D04-3070,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, February 28, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a decedent had a life estate in her home and occupied it continuously before her death pursuant to the right provided to her in an irrevocable trust, she was an "owner" of the home for purposes of devising the homestead protection on her death to her daughter pursuant to Art. X, § 4(b), Fla. Const.
|
|||||
| Dawson v. State, No. 4D05-1189,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The State's failure to disclose the address or means of contacting a confidential informant was not a fundamental error requiring the sua sponte dismissal of the charges as there was no showing of willfulness and the defense never really objected to the failure to provide the address.
|
|||||
| Eichelberger v. State, Case No. 2D05-3630,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, SECOND DISTRICT, February 28, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions for three separate counts of aggravated stalking violated the constitutional guarantees under U.S. Const. amend. V and Fla. Const. art. I, § 9, against double jeopardy as the State did not present evidence of any break in defendant's course of conduct that would mark the end of one series of acts and the start of another.
|
|||||
| Fabel v. Masterson, No. 4D05-4395,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred in excusing the buyers from complying with requirements of a land sales contract because of an active lis pendens on the subject property, as the buyers breached the contract twice, the seller had a right to cure any defect, and the contract outlined remedies if the seller could not convey marketable title by the closing date.
|
|||||
| Felton v. State, No. 4D05-1176,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's conviction for false imprisonment and other crimes was reversed, because the trial court erred in precluding defendant from cross-examining the victim concerning her methadone use at the time of the incident, as the victim's methadone use fell under one of the permissible uses of drug use to impeach a witness.
|
|||||
| Forman v. State Dep't of Children & Families, No. 4D06-1770,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Freedom Life Ins. Co. of Am. v. Wallant, No. 4D06-4610,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FOURTH DISTRICT, February 28, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiffs' motion to dismiss an insurance company's second motion to compel arbitration was granted, because § 682.03(1), Fla. Stat. (2005), did not authorize multiple motions to compel arbitration, and the essential nature of arbitration suggested that multiple attempts to assert it were not coherent with the right.
|
|||||
| Gadea v. Star Cruises, Ltd., No. 3D05-2300,
COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, THIRD DISTRICT, February 28, 2007, Opinion Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As mere presence of ship owner's subsidiary in Florida did not subject the owner, a foreign corporation, to long-arm jurisdiction, and there was no evidence the owner exercised a high degree of control over the subsidiary, employee allegedly injured on owner's ship failed to establish long-arm jurisdiction over owner under § 48.193(2), Fla. Stat.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
