THESE ARE NOT ALL OF THE CASES RELEASED BY THE COURTS FOR THE WEEK.
To see others not presented here, log in for more comprehensive weekly listings.

Attorney's fees -- Prevailing party -- Entitlement -- No error in denying prevailing defendant's request for attorney's fees -- Although prior settlement agreement between the parties entitled a prevailing party to attorney's fees in the event of further litigation, defendant was required to have stated her claim for attorney's fees in her answers, which she failed to do -- Defendant's requests for attorney's fees contained in her motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment, filed more than two years apart, were insufficient to place plaintiff on notice that defendant was claiming attorney's fees for the entire action pursuant to the settlement agreement
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Insurance -- Property -- Coverage -- Appraisal -- Prejudgment interest -- Trial court did not err by failing to award prejudgment interest for covered loss because insurer's timely payment after entry of an appraisal award was not the functional equivalent of a denial of coverage -- Because insurer timely paid the outstanding coverage balance within 30 days of the appraisal award, insurer complied with its obligations under the policy, such that insured did not suffer an out-of-pocket pecuniary loss prior to entry of the judgment -- Court rejects argument that insurer's initial default and partial affirmative defenses were tantamount to a denial of coverage or a waiver of its deferred payment rights under the policy
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Real property -- Contracts -- Power of attorney -- Validity -- Witnesses -- Trial court did not err in determining that power of attorney signed by decedent in Argentina was invalid for failure to include two subscribing witnesses -- Section 709.2105 requires that extraterritorial powers of attorney have signatures of two subscribing witnesses to be valid -- While POA may have complied with execution requirements in Argentina, that did not validate the subject POA which pertained to the right to sell and manage property in Florida -- Section 709.2106(3), which allows for the portability of POAs between states if a POA is executed in compliance with another state's requirements, does not apply in instant action because Argentina does not fall within statutory definition of “another state” -- Strict compliance with execution requirements set forth in section 709.2105 is required -- Because POA was invalid, any action taken pursuant to the POA, including quitclaim deed conveying real property, is void
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Real property -- Homeowners associations -- Declaration -- Reformation -- Limitation of actions -- Action seeking to reform declaration fifteen years after declaration was recorded so that it included defendants' properties -- Trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of plaintiff homeowners association based on determination that section 95.11(2)(b) was inapplicable to reformation actions -- Section 95.11(2)(b) is the appropriate statute of limitations for a reformation action of a recorded property declaration -- There is no reason why an action to reform a recorded declaration should not be deemed an action on an obligation founded on a written instrument
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Real property -- Taxation -- Assessments -- Annual assessment cap -- Change of ownership -- No error in determining that the conveyance of non-homestead residential property via quitclaim deed from taxpayer's owners to taxpayer constituted a change of ownership or control of the subject property, resulting in a loss of the annual 10% assessment cap pursuant to section 193.1554 -- Court rejects argument that conveyance to taxpayer was merely a transfer between legal and equitable title -- Quitclaim deed unambiguously transferred fee simple ownership of property to taxpayer, and no document in record purports to reserve to taxpayer's owners any interest, equitable or otherwise, in the subject property -- Furthermore, taxpayer is a limited liability company and section 605.0110 unequivocally specifies that all property originally contributed to the limited liability company or subsequently acquired by a limited liability company by purchase or other method is limited liability company property
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Rules of Appellate Procedure -- Amendment -- Appeal and review proceedings -- Stay pending review -- Confidentiality -- Rules 9.140, 9.141, 9.142, 9.146, and 9.301 amended to provide consistency and accuracy to references to the clerk -- Rules 9.145(e) and 9.146(f) amended to remove references to documents filed in paper format
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Rules of Appellate Procedure -- Amendment -- Judicial review of administrative action -- Costs and attorney's fees -- Attorneys -- Scope of representation -- Amendment to requirements for the filing of motions for attorneys' fees in administrative appeals and seeking review of orders on such motions -- Deadline to file motion for attorney's fees in discretionary review proceedings tied to filing of jurisdictional briefs
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Rules Regulating the Florida Bar -- Amendment -- Retirement -- Reinstatement to membership -- Insurance for members of board of governors, officers, grievance committee members, UPL committee members, clients' security fund committee members, and employees -- Confidentiality of information -- Special responsibilities of a prosecutor -- Trust accounts -- Purpose -- Activities -- Certification of student -- Approval of legal aid organizations -- Supervision -- Continuation of practice program after completion of law school program or graduation -- Certification of members of out-of-state bars -- Relationship to the Supreme Court commission on professionalism
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Torts -- Negligence -- Automobile accident -- Trial court erred in dismissing direct negligence claims against supervising employees of corporation who were sued individually for an automobile accident caused by a subordinate employee of corporation -- Trial court erroneously applied caselaw to extent it concluded that a negligent employment claim against a supervisor individually requires that the subordinate employee's actions be outside the scope of employment -- A claim of negligent hiring, training, retention, supervision, or entrustment against a supervisor individually, as opposed to the corporate employer, does not depend on whether the subordinate employee's actions were outside the scope of employment -- A negligent employee claim against a supervisor individually must include facts showing the supervisor's “personal involvement” in a tort that led to plaintiff's injuries, or at least knowledge amounting to acquiescence in the wrongful act -- Complaint alleged sufficient fact to avoid dismissal of negligent employment claim, even though collision with plaintiff occurred just off corporate property and the supervisors were not in or around the corporate vehicle at that time, where complaint alleged facts showing that supervisor at least had knowledge amounting to acquiescence in wrongful act of allowing the driver to drive the van under circumstances demonstrating he was unfit to do so -- Trial court improperly dismissed the individual liability claims against supervisors as well as vicarious liability claim against employer
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Torts -- Premises liability -- Slip and fall -- Transitory substance -- Knowledge of dangerous condition -- Summary judgment -- Trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of defendant -- There was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether defendant had constructive knowledge of the liquid that allegedly caused plaintiff's injury where plaintiff testified that there was a large amount of liquid, the liquid was dirty and slimy, and that plaintiff had observed footprints in the puddle that did not belong to her -- A reasonable jury could credit plaintiff's testimony and infer that the tracked footprints plaintiff observed in the large amount of dirty liquid indicated that the liquid substance was there long enough for several individuals to walk through it such that defendant should have detected it, particularly where defendant testified that they had an employee stationed in the area at all times
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Torts -- Schools -- Sexual abuse -- Negligent hiring, supervision, and retention -- Limitation of actions -- Action against school board alleging that school board employee had sexually abused plaintiff's minor child -- No error in granting summary judgment in favor of school board where lawsuit was filed more than four years after the last alleged act of abuse -- Discussion of sections 768.28(14), 95.11(9), and 95.011 -- Court rejects argument that, because civil claim relates to sexual battery, plaintiff could bring her lawsuit at anytime under section 95.11(9) -- If a different statute prescribes a different time, then the periods of time in chapter 95 do not apply -- When a plaintiff sues a sovereign immune governmental entity because one of its agents is alleged to have sexually abused a minor child, section 768.28(14)'s limitation period applies
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Wrongful death -- Product liability -- Motor vehicles -- Defective design -- Jurisdiction -- Foreign corporations -- Minimum contacts -- Action brought against Japanese corporation that designed a domestically sold vehicle which caught fire after a rear-end collision -- Trial court did not err in denying defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction -- Record supports reasonable inference that defendant purposefully availed itself of the markets of the U.S. and Florida where defendant admitted that its vehicles were intended for the United States market, including Florida, that it designed vehicles for that market, registered trademarks to advertise vehicles in that market, and ordered recalls expressly naming Florida -- Additionally, defendant's act of creating, deputizing, and utilizing its American subsidiary qualified as marketing the product through a distributor who had agreed to serve as the sales agent in Florida, and provided the “additional conduct” necessary to establish specific jurisdiction -- Plaintiff's claims arise out of or relate to defendant's contacts with Florida, all of which related to facilitating the sale of its vehicles in Florida
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal Law Headnotes (Jump to Civil Law Headnotes)

THESE ARE NOT ALL OF THE CASES RELEASED BY THE COURTS FOR THE WEEK.
To see others not presented here, log in for more comprehensive weekly listings.

Criminal law -- Murder -- Attempted second degree murder -- Jury instructions -- Principals -- Trial counsel did not timely object to trial court's reading of “Principals” instruction to jury, and therefore did not preserve that objection for appeal -- Trial counsel did not raise a contemporaneous objection as required to preserve an issue for appellate review where counsel did not object to the “Principals” instruction until after closing arguments, and thus after the state had provided its unobjected-to explanation of how the “Principals” instruction applied to the evidence -- Although state presented insufficient evidence to support the trial court's reading of the “Principals” instruction to jury, the error in reading the “Principals” instruction did not rise to level of fundamental error because state could have obtained the guilty verdicts against the defendant without the alleged error's assistance
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Post conviction relief -- Successive motion -- No error in summarily denying successive post conviction motion filed under Rule 3.851 which sought vacatur of death sentence based on alleged newly discovered evidence that pertained exclusively to the coperpetrator, a minor at time of murder and therefore ineligible for death penalty -- Court committed no error in summarily denying claim that defendant's death sentence, compared to coperpetrator's term-of-life sentence, is disproportionate under relative culpability principles -- Relative culpability analysis does not apply when a coperpetrator is legally ineligible for the death penalty, including because of his age -- Court did not err in summarily denying claim that “newly discovered evidence” mitigates his death sentence, where sentencing court found that independent aggravators counseled in favor of the death penalty, and clearly explained that it did not make a triggerman finding or rely on an inference as to the identity of the shooter
VIEW OPINION (login required)