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.

Corporations -- Non-profit -- Members' derivative actions -- Presuit requirements -- Condominiums -- Homeowners associations -- Trial court departed from essential requirements of law by denying association's motion to dismiss, for failure to comply with presuit requirements of section 617.07401, unit owners' action seeking injunctive and declaratory relief based on defendants' alleged breach of fiduciary duty, corporate mismanagement, and improper corporate expenditures in violation of declaration of condominium, its bylaws, and its articles of incorporation -- Section 617.07401, which governs procedures for bringing derivative suits, does not conflict with section 718.303, which provides unit owners a cause of action for certain condominium-related violations -- Because complaint alleged derivative claims, plaintiffs were required to comply with statutory presuit requirements
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Estates -- Property of estate -- Homestead -- Cooperative unit -- Retroactive application of statutory amendment -- 2021 amendment to section 719.103(25), which provided that an interest in a cooperative unit is an interest in real property, did not apply retroactively to date of owner's death -- Amendment, to the extent it transforms cooperative units into real property protected as homestead, impacts substantive rights of diverse parties that trigger the presumption against retroactivity, and at no point, either in text of amendment or in Chapter Law enacting the amendment, did the legislature state that it would have retroactive affect -- Although presumption in favor of prospective application generally does not apply to “remedial” legislation, such statutes are recognized as remedial only because they relate to remedies or modes that do not create new or take away vested rights -- Recent controversy -- Sequence of events recognizing that this area of law might be in flux, even if a valid rule of interpretation, does not change result given substantive rights at issue, legislature's directive that amendment have a future effective date, and absence of any indication that legislature viewed amendment as remedial or serving only as a clarification -- Affirmed
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Florida Bar -- Rules -- Amendment -- Standards for board certification in insurance coverage law
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Florida Probate Rules -- Amendment -- Adversary proceedings -- Discovery and subpoena -- Disclosure requirements
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Insurance -- Property -- Attorney's fees -- Prevailing party -- Contingency fee multiplier -- In awarding attorney's fees to insureds, trial court erred by applying a 2.0 contingency fee multiplier to lodestar figure where insureds did not present any evidence that the relevant market required a contingency fee multiplier to obtain counsel in the case -- Additionally, insureds failed to present competent substantial evidence that counsel was unable to mitigate risk of nonpayment in any way where there was no specific, non-inferential evidence that insureds could not have afforded or lacked financial means to pay either a retainer or counsel's hourly fee
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Mortgage foreclosure -- Indispensable parties -- Incapacitated ward who holds title to realty must be named as party defendant in a foreclosure suit -- Trial court erred in dismissing ward from foreclosure suit based on plaintiff's failure to file motion substituting guardian for ward within 90 days after guardian filed statement that ward was incapacitated -- Guardianship did not have legal effect of divesting ward of his ownership interest in property, but merely empowered guardian to act on ward's behalf and for his benefit as it related to the property at issue -- Reversed and remanded
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Municipal corporations -- Public utilities -- Regional authorities -- Charter -- Amendment -- State preemption -- Special laws -- Regional utilities authority created by special law enacted by state legislature which amended city's charter -- Trial court erred by granting summary judgment in favor of city on RUA's claim that a proposed charter amendment dissolving the RUA conflicted with state legislature's special act based on determination that, under the broad home rule powers, a local municipality has the right to amend its charter regardless of provisions in the charter to the contrary -- Regardless of whether state legislature creates a city's utility authority directly by special law or indirectly by enacting a special law that amends the city's charter, the utility's authority stems from a special law enacted by the legislature, and a municipality cannot subsequently adopt a charter amendment that conflicts with that legislative enactment
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Name change -- Minors -- Trial court abused discretion in ruling that it was not in best interest of child to change her name -- Trial court abused its discretion by denying mother's requested name change pursuant to section 68.07 on ground that mother was precluded from utilizing this name change statute to request a name change because she did not initially give the child the desired name, or change the child's name to that desired name in the first year of life pursuant to sections 382.013(3)(c) and 382.016(1)(a) -- These statutes are not a barrier to the mother's petition to change the child's first and last name pursuant to section 68.07 -- Trial court abused discretion by denying name change based on previous denial of petition for a name change -- There is no statutory restriction on number of times a person may file a name change petition, and res judicata does not apply
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Rules of General Practice and Judicial Administration -- Amendment -- Supreme court committees on standard jury instructions -- Judicial branch records retention schedule for administrative records
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Rules of Civil Procedure -- Amendment -- General provisions governing discovery -- Initial disclosure
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Rules of Juvenile Procedure -- Amendment -- Forms -- Petition for adjudication and permanent commitment pre-adjudication of dependency for deceased parents -- Petition for permanent commitment post-adjudication of dependency for deceased parents
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Rules of Appellate Procedure -- Amendment -- Forms -- Amicus Curiae
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Workers' compensation -- Firefighters -- Compensable accidents -- Heart disease -- Presumption of compensability -- Change in employment -- Liable employer -- Last injurious exposure rule -- Claimant who, after being diagnosed with coronary artery disease while employed by former employer, did not report heart condition as a workers' compensation injury, but instead used accrued sick leave and retired before beginning work with current employer -- Judge of compensation claims did not err in ordering former employer to pay claimant's impairment benefits and denying former employer's claim that current employer was responsible for paying benefits under last injurious exposure rule -- There can be no injurious exposure in heart disease cases where presumption provided by section 112.18 does not apply, absent concession or finding that disease is compensable without benefit of presumption -- Because claimant's preemployment physical with current employer showed evidence of heart disease, the presumption of compensability created by section 112.18 did not apply to his employment there -- Furthermore, former employer presented no evidence demonstrating any connection between claimant's heart condition and his employment with current employer
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 -- Burglary of conveyance with assault and battery -- Sentencing -- Prison releasee reoffender -- Qualifying offenses -- Trial court did not err in sentencing defendant as PRR for conviction of burglary of conveyance with assault and battery, despite fact that charging document alleged that defendant committed burglary of convenayce with assault or battery -- Trial court properly based its PRR determination on the statutory elements of the offense of conviction, rather than on charging document -- Conviction and sentence affirmed
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Possession of controlled substance -- Constructive possession -- Evidence -- Trial court erred by denying defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal where state failed to present sufficient independent evidence that defendant constructively possessed contraband found in a locked safe that a family friend attempted to remove from a house in defendant's neighborhood -- Defendant's possession of a key to the house did not establish constructive possession of the safe that had been inside the house where house belonged to a third party and state presented no evidence that defendant owned, resided in, or otherwise exercised control over the house -- Because state failed to establish that defendant had exclusive possession of house, state could not rest on defendant's possession of safe key to show that he knew of or controlled what the safe contained -- A key affording access, without more, establishes only opportunity, not possession -- Defendant's family connection to individual carrying safe was insufficient to establish constructive possession where state presented no evidence that individual was acting at defendant's direction or that defendant was aware that individual was removing the safe from the premises
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Sex offender probation -- Modification -- Evidence -- Polygraph results -- Defendant questioned by probation officer and treatment provider after they became concerned with defendant's polygraph examination results -- Trial court did not err in admitting defendant's written answers to probation officer's questions which admitted violations of conditions contained in VOP affidavit, or treatment provider's testimony that defendant had admitted violations when questioned -- Methods used by probation officer and treatment provider did not impermissibly circumvent statutory prohibition against the use of polygraph results as evidence in court -- Section 948.30(2)(a) prohibits only the “results” of a polygraph examination being used as evidence “in court” -- Statute places no evidentiary restriction upon a party's admissions made separately from the actual polygraph results and does not prohibit a probation officer or treatment provider from using results in an investigation -- Even if admission of evidence was in error, affirmance of probation modification would still be required where other evidence showed that defendant violated probation by failing to complete sex offender treatment, and it is clear from record that court would have imposed same extension of probation if that had been defendant's only violation
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Vehicular homicide -- Reckless driving causing property damage -- Evidence -- Expert testimony -- Lay opinion -- New trial is appropriate on substantive counts because trial court admitted a detective's specialized opinion testimony estimating the vehicles' speeds as lay investigative testimony without conducting the expert testimony analysis required by section 90.702, Florida Statutes (2024), and state has not established beyond reasonable doubt that the error did not contribute to verdict -- When detective opined as to vehicles' speeds based on a formula which he apparently learned during his training, this was not permissible lay opinion testimony -- Error was not harmless where detective's calculations purported to corroborate the vehicles' event data recorders on an issue central to whether defendant drove recklessly and state has not demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that there is no reasonable possibility the erroneously admitted testimony contributed to verdict -- Use of six-person jury affirmed -- Resentencing with corrected scoresheet is required in violation of probation case given the reversal for new trial on substantive case
VIEW OPINION (login required)