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 -- Real property sale -- Arbitration -- Arbitrable issues -- Determination by trial court -- Third-party complaint brought against seller seeking declaration that corrective deed was void because it attempted to create an entirely new legal description for easement over adjacent land and alleging that seller fraudulently concealed that property's drain field was located on servient estate -- Trial court did not err in concluding that it had authority to determine arbitrability of claims where arbitration clause in contract for sale made only a general reference to the arbitration rules of the American Arbitration Association, and seller argued only that Consumer Rules applied to this real estate dispute despite fact that Consumer Rules expressly exclude real estate purchases -- To extent trial court may have erred by incorrectly relying instead on the now-archived Real Estate Rules or by otherwise concluding that parties' agreement had failed to “clearly and unmistakably” evidence an intent to delegate question of arbitrability to the arbitrator, seller invited that result -- Trial court erred in determining that neither claim was arbitrable under arbitration clause, which applied to “any dispute arising out of the transaction, sale, contract, or closing associated” with the property -- Claim for declaratory relief is arbitrable because parties' dispute over whether the original deed or the corrective deed correctly describes the easement that parties intended be conveyed has a direct relationship with sales contract -- Claim of fraudulent concealment has direct relationship to contract, and is therefore arbitrable, because claim is inextricably intertwined with the real estate transaction, and because buyers relied on seller's failure to comply with its duty to disclose, which is a duty that emanates from the contractual relationship between the parties
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Estates -- Personal representative -- Beneficiaries -- Attorney's fees -- Charging lien -- Charging lien filed by attorney who had represented personal representative and potential beneficiary of estate before withdrawing during arbitration on Financial Industry Regulatory Authority claim when it was anticipated that opposing counsel would invoke witness-advocate rule if attorney testified -- Independent judgment -- Trial court's order adjudicating charging lien reflects a lack of independent judgment where substantial portions of the order track the parties' written closing arguments, including identical citation formatting, language, and structure; trial court made no findings on the record before issuing order and did not announce any preliminary rulings; and order contains several findings suggesting adoption of counsel's advocacy rather than independent review of the record -- While competent substantial evidence supports trial court's finding that attorney's FINRA-related services were not compensable because that claim was not authorized by clients, record does not support trial court's finding as to how many of attorney's billed hours were expended on the FINRA claim -- Duplicative fees -- Evidence did not support trial court's deduction of fees for amounts clients paid to law firm who entered limited appearance following attorney's withdrawal where, although evidence reflected work performed by law firm and attorney over same period, neither clients nor trial court identified any duplicative billing entries -- Remand for de novo hearing
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Insurance -- Uninsured motorist -- Coverage -- Damages -- Future medical expenses -- Trial court erred by denying insurer's motion for directed verdict as to future medical expenses -- Insured failed to establish that expenses for certain treatments were reasonably certain to be incurred in the future where expert life care planner's testimony was replete with the words “may,” “could,” and “if”; physician's assistant testified that it was unlikely that insured would undergo some of the treatments and that he planned to treat her solely with medication; and insured is currently unwilling to undergo the treatments and testified only that “she could change her mind” in the future -- Award of future medical expenses reversed -- Future non-economic damages -- New trial on noneconomic damages is not warranted where, although insured's counsel argued that jury could take the amount awarded for economic damages and multiply that by a certain number to reach the amount of noneconomic damages, it is clear from trial transcript that insured's counsel's primary argument was that future noneconomic damages should be based on the loss of time suffered by insured as well as all the life changes she had to make
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Prohibition -- Judges -- Disqualification -- Domestic violence proceedings -- Appeals -- Certiorari -- Abuse of litigation process -- AI-generated filings -- Lengthy opinion solely addressing counsel's filing of “what appears to be ‘AI slop' ” -- Counsel ordered to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed for submitting frivolous filings to court
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Public employees -- Whistle-blowers -- Damages -- Noneconomic damages -- Sovereign immunity -- Non-economic damages are not available as a remedy under Public Whistlebower Act because state has not clearly and unequivocally waived its sovereign immunity for such damages
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 -- Pretrial detention -- Bail -- Modification -- Denial -- Habeas corpus -- In denying defendant's motion to modify bail because of an alleged inability to afford current monetary bail, trial court erred by basing its decision entirely on the nature of defendant's alleged offenses -- Trial court was required to consider all the other factors listed in section 903.046(2) -- Additionally, because defendant's charges were not designated as “dangerous” under section 907.041(5)(a), there was a statutory presumption in favor of release on nonmonetary conditions -- Petition granted
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Search and seizure -- Traffic stop -- Trial court did not err by denying defendant's motion to suppress evidence obtained following traffic stop for failure to signal while changing lanes and failure to drive within a single lane -- Officer had probable cause to stop defendant for traffic infractions where officer testified that there were other vehicles on the road when defendant switched lanes without signaling and that defendant's driving pattern presented a safety concern to other vehicles in roadway -- In addition, officer demonstrated a well-founded suspicion that defendant was impaired where erratic driving included changing lanes twice without using a turn signal, weaving in and out of lane over course of a block or two, and failing to stop for four to five blocks after officer turned on lights, horn, yelp, and sirens to get the defendant's attention
VIEW OPINION (login required)