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.

Consumer law -- Social media platforms -- Addictive features -- Deceptive and unfair trade practices -- Immunity -- Appeals -- Certiorari -- Irreparable harm -- Petition seeking review of order denying social media platform's motion to dismiss complaint alleging violations of Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, arguing that order deprives it of its statutory right of immunity and First Amendment rights -- Petition dismissed for failure to show irreparable harm -- Discussion of section 230 of the Communications Decency Act -- While defendant meets “interactive computer service” provider definition under section 230, section 230 does not confer absolute immunity -- Section 230 narrowly shields providers from claims seeking to treat defendant as publisher or speaker of third-party content or hold it liable for actions related to its screening of objectionable content -- Such limited statutory immunity is not absolute immunity from involvement in any type of lawsuit such that defendant would suffer irreparable harm merely by litigating the matter -- Constitutional law -- Speech -- Defendant failed to establish how order irreparably harms its First Amendment rights where order does not limit defendant's speech in any way or compel defendant to do anything
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Counties -- Code enforcement -- Jurisdiction -- Exhaustion of administrative remedies -- Counterclaim filed by county seeking a declaration that trailer park can be liable for tenant fire code violations under section 723.024 -- Trial court erred by dismissing county's counterclaim based on conclusion that it lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because county had not exhausted administrative remedies available under local ordinance establishing code enforcement procedure -- Administrative exhaustion does not require the government to go through its own administrative scheme before exercising an otherwise available judicial remedy
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Injunctions -- Domestic violence -- Qualifying incidents -- Remoteness in time -- Appeals -- Preservation of issue -- Petition filed after respondent entered petitioner's condo unannounced to ask her about his car -- While trial court erred in considering a past incident of domestic violence not referenced in petition, trial court did not abuse its discretion in entering injunction for protection against domestic violence -- Although incident precipitating petitioner's request for injunction, standing alone, did not provide a basis for final injunction, incidents of past violence that were referenced in petition supported injunction's issuance -- Past incidents also established that petitioner had a reasonable fear that domestic violence could be imminent because they contextualized respondent's unannounced visit to petitioner's home -- Respondent failed to preserve argument that prior incidents, which occurred several years before petition was filed, were too remote in time to support final injunction where argument was raised for the first time in motion for rehearing -- Conflict certified
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Mortgage foreclosure -- Default -- Evidence -- Trial court erred by entering judgment in favor of borrowers based on determination that bank failed to prove default where, although record supports trial court's finding that four disputed 2015 payments were not properly reversed and returned to borrowers, evidence showed that borrowers had not made a mortgage payment since June 2017 -- Bank's failure to accept borrower's payments after April 2017 for failure to include the amounts of the four improperly reversed payments did not excuse borrowers from their ongoing obligations under note and mortgage -- A dispute over proper accounting of payments with bank or servicer does not, without more, excuse borrower's obligation to make timely payments -- Defense of tender of payment fails where borrowers neither offered to pay their unpaid mortgage payments into court's registry nor did they possess the amount due under mortgage when suit was filed -- Evidence was insufficient to prove that bank acted with unclean hands where borrowers failed to present evidence of conduct amounting to fraud or otherwise show that bank acted in a sneaky, unscrupulous, or tricky manner -- Bank had no duty to reach out to borrowers or offer to modify loan, and nothing in record shows bank affirmatively doing anything other than proceeding toward foreclosure based on their position on the four reversed payments
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Torts -- Negligence -- Duty -- Judgment on the pleadings -- Action filed after decayed tree located on defendant's property fell over and landed on plaintiff's house -- Trial court erred by granting defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings based on determination that defendant did not owe plaintiff any legal duty to prevent tree from causing harm to plaintiff's property because defendant was unaware of decayed condition of tree -- Complaint adequately alleged that defendant owed a common law duty to exercise reasonable care to prevent the rotten tree from causing harm on plaintiff's property where defendant did not dispute that knowingly maintaining a large rotten oak tree on its property foreseeably created a zone of risk of harm to its neighbors -- There is no exception that negates defendant's duty -- Discussion of the “Massachusetts rule,” which provides that landowners are not liable when the limbs or vegetation of healthy trees grow onto or over a neighbor's property -- Massachusetts rule is not applicable to instant case because rule does not encompass diseased trees -- Court declines to decide whether Massachusetts rule is a recognized exception to duty normally imposed by common law negligence
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 -- Search and seizure -- Stop and frisk -- Pat down -- Lawfulness of detention -- Noncriminal infraction -- Totality of circumstances -- Police officers who were actively investigating a crime at night on a particularly dangerous street known for shootings and bicycle theft lawfully stopped defendant after observing him riding a bicycle at night without a light while dragging a second bicycle -- Pat-down search was justified where there were multiple factual circumstances suggesting potential danger to police, including officer's observation of bulge under defendant's shirt that second officer, through his experience with firearms, reasonably believed to be a firearm with an extended magazine; defendant's behavior, which officers construed, based on their training and experience, as an attempt to conceal the firearm; and defendant's close proximity to the officers -- Discussion of stop in context of Florida precedent establishing proposition that Terry stop and frisk cannot be based solely on individual's apparent possession of concealed gun
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Trafficking in hydrocodone -- Speedy trial -- Discharge -- Purple liquid and other controlled substances discovered in defendant's vehicle during traffic stop -- Defendant initially arrested only for possession of the other controlled substances -- Trial court erred by discharging defendant from charge of trafficking in hydrocodone, which was brought almost nine months after arrest for other controlled substances after purple liquid was tested, based on determination that the speedy trial period had expired -- To be discharged under rule 3.191, defendant must show more than mere fact that evidence leading to subsequent charge was first discovered as a result of original arrest -- Defendant's possession of hydrocodone arose from a separate criminal episode where hydrocodone was stored in a different container than the other drugs, was in a different compartment of the vehicle, and, unlike other substances, was within defendant's immediate reach for his own consumption -- Whether state had probable cause to arrest defendant for trafficking in hydrocodone at time of arrest for other substances is irrelevant -- Speedy trial period did not begin to run until defendant was taken into custody for trafficking in hydrocodone
VIEW OPINION (login required)