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.

Contracts -- Construction -- Unlicensed contractors -- Limited liability company with which homeowners contracted was an unlicensed contractor, and therefore could not enforce contract, where LLC was never qualified as a business organization contractor by Department of Business and Professional Regulation as required by section 489.119(2) -- Owner of LLC, who was a certified general contractor, could not perform as LLC's qualifying agent where owner failed to apply for registration or certification on behalf of the business
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Contracts -- Quasi-contracts -- Unjust enrichment -- Unpaid services -- Trial court did not err in denying motions for directed verdict and to set aside verdict on ground that unjust enrichment claim was barred by existence of express contract between parties -- Prejudgment interest -- Trial court erred in awarding prejudgment interest from date of verdict instead of date of loss -- Date of loss was established when plaintiff sent defendant a letter demanding payment with accompanying invoices
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Insurance -- Homeowners -- Coverage -- Replacement cost policy -- Payment splitting -- Damages -- Evidence -- Policy with payment-splitting provision which provided that insurer would initially pay actual cash value for loss and then pay any remaining amounts necessary for repairs as the work was performed -- Trial court erred by setting measure of damages at actual cash value and excluding insureds' evidence of replacement costs based on determination that, because suit was filed before repairs were completed, the policy and section 627.7011 precluded insurer's liability for replacement costs until repair work was performed -- Under plain language of policy and statute, insurer's option to split payments on covered claims could not be employed to exclude and limit the insureds' damages evidence at a trial alleging wrongful denial of coverage -- Conflict certified
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Insurance -- Liability -- Businessowners -- Homeowners associations -- Exclusions -- Physical and sexual abuse -- Doctrine of reasonable expectations -- Under plain and unambiguous terms of insurance policy, insurer did not have duty to defend or indemnify homeowners association in wrongful death action arising out of incident in which homeowner was ambushed and shot at his home by unknown assailants who gained unrestricted access to housing development -- Applying plain language of policy, provision excluding liability coverage for bodily injury “arising out of, related to or in any other way connected to actual, threatened or attempted physical abuse” is not ambiguous, and ambush and fatal shooting plainly fell within the exclusion -- Discussion of numerous similar interpretations by courts in other jurisdictions -- Reasonable expectations -- Insured's expectations as to scope of coverage does not change result -- Florida Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected doctrine of reasonable expectations in the interpretation of insurance policies -- Illusory policy -- Exclusion does not act to exclude all conduct that causes harm so as to render policy illusory -- Policy is illusory only if there is internal contradiction completely negating coverage policy expresses to provide, and physical and sexual abuse exclusion is in harmony with the remainder of the policy
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Mortgage foreclosure -- Counterclaim for quiet title and declaratory judgment -- Priority of recorded instruments -- Trial court erred in entering summary judgment in favor of plaintiff in action to foreclose mortgage on property defendant/judgment creditor had purchased at sheriff's sale following foreclosure of judgment lien -- Trial court further erred in awarding attorney's fees to plaintiff based on provision of mortgage to which defendant was not a party -- Judgment lien was created when certified copy of judgment was recorded in official records of the county in which property was located, and this lien took priority over later-filed mortgage -- Trial court's nunc pro tunc amendment to the judgment merely corrected a clerical error and therefore related back and took effect as of date the judgment was originally rendered without affecting the priority of the judgment lien -- Mortgage that was created after judgment was recorded was extinguished when judgment creditor purchased the property at sheriff's sale because the purchaser at an execution sale takes title subject only to encumbrances existing at the time the underlying judgment was recorded -- Neither boilerplate language on sheriff's deed nor sheriff's notice of sale support plaintiff's position that its mortgage was not extinguished -- Because sheriff's sale extinguished mortgage, purchaser at sheriff's sale is entitled to summary judgment on its counterclaim for quiet title -- Declaratory judgment -- Counterclaim for declaratory judgment dismissed, as bona fide, actual, present, and practical need for declaration no longer exists in light of appellate court's holdings on foreclosure and quiet title claims
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Rules of Civil Procedure -- Amendment -- Discovery -- Timing and sequence
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Torts -- Automobile accident -- Damages -- Future medical expenses -- Evidence -- Expert -- New opinion -- Trial court erred by admitting into evidence a cost estimate for plaintiff's radiofrequency ablation treatment and treating physician's corresponding testimony where estimate was not prepared or disclosed until after trial had begun, and physician was unable to provide even a rough estimate of total cost during her pre-trial deposition because she lacked personal knowledge -- Although defendant was aware of physician's treatment recommendation, cost estimate and testimony constituted new, undisclosed evidence which subjected defendant to trial by ambush -- Defendant could not cure prejudice by having his expert testify about reasonableness of cost estimate where, given timing of new evidence and trial court's denial of a motion for continuance, defense counsel had insufficient opportunity to consult with defendant's expert
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Torts -- Automobile accident -- Denial of motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict and alternative motion for new trial -- Trial court did not err in denying plaintiff's motion for judgment notwithstanding verdict, which argued that verdict was contrary to manifest weight of evidence -- Verdict finding that defendant's negligence was not legal cause of loss, injury, or damage to plaintiff was not contrary to manifest weight of evidence -- Although defense expert “conceded” that there may have been some temporary exacerbation of plaintiff's preexisting conditions, expert unequivocally opined that accident did not contribute to plaintiff's back and neck issues, which were chronic and degenerative -- Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying plaintiff's alternative motion for new trial based on defense counsel's purported violation of motion in limine excluding reference to the plaintiff's prior alcohol use or abuse and prescription drug use or abuse -- There was no written order or oral pronouncement granting or denying motion, and defendants' supposed agreement to the motion was not reflected by record -- References to plaintiff's use of prescription drugs during cross-examination and closing argument were not preserved for appeal by objection or motion for mistrial and did not rise to level of fundamental error
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Torts -- Negligence -- Premises liability -- Open and obvious danger -- Summary judgment -- Trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of defendant on claims of premises liability and negligence brought by plaintiff who was injured when he fell into a hole which initially formed on defendant's property and gradually approached plaintiff's property as it expanded over the course of time -- Record evidence demonstrated that a genuine issue of fact existed as to whether plaintiff fell on defendant's property or on his own property, and location of fall was material to determining what duties, if any, defendant owed to plaintiff -- Open and obvious danger of area surrounding hole was also genuinely disputed material of fact that precluded summary judgment
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 -- Sentencing -- Sentencing errors -- Appeals -- Preservation of issue -- Fundamental error -- Defendant's life sentence is reversed where trial court erroneously believed that it had no discretion in sentencing under violent career criminal statute -- Defendant was not required to first raise claim by way of a rule 3.800(b) motion because trial court's mistaken belief did not constitute a “sentencing error” under the rule -- Errors recognized as “sentencing errors” under rule 3.800(b) are those which are apparent in orders entered as a result of the sentencing process -- Error at issue cannot be discerned from four corners of sentencing order and is not one which inheres in the sentence itself -- Under circumstances, trial court's failure to recognize its judicial discretion constituted fundamental error
VIEW OPINION (login required)