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.

Administrative law -- Office of Insurance Regulation -- Declaratory statement -- Entitlement -- OIR did not err by denying specialty pharmacy's petition for declaratory statement seeking the OIR's opinion on whether section 626.8825(2)(g) mandated that a pharmacy benefit manager include petitioner in its pharmacy benefit plan or program specialty network -- To be entitled to a declaratory statement under section 120.565, a petition must apply to the petitioner's particular circumstances so that the petitioner may select a proper course of action, and may not seek an agency's opinion solely to determine the application of a statute to a person other than the petitioner -- OIR correctly interpreted section 626.8825(2)(g) as not applicable to petitioner's circumstances because that subsection only applies to contracts between PBMs and pharmacy benefit plans or programs, not pharmacies -- Because petition sought an opinion solely about the actions of a PBM under a contract governed by the subsection to include or exclude a pharmacy, petitioner was not seeking an opinion in order to select its own proper course of action, but rather impermissibly sought an opinion about a PBM's course of action
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Dependent children -- Termination of parental rights -- Burden of proof -- Federal preemption -- Indian Child Welfare Act -- Enactment of the ICWA did not preempt “clear and convincing” standard that applies to findings state requires before a parent's rights are terminated, nor does it preempt state from regulating the relevant field -- The ICWA sets only minimum standards to which state law may add
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Florida Bar -- Admissions -- Supreme Court rules -- Amendment -- Documents filed by registrant or applicant -- Application fee for reapplication for admission based on rehabilitation -- Stale file fee -- Defective applications -- Non-compliance -- Investigative hearing cost -- Formal hearing postponement -- Formal hearing cost -- Reapplication after postponement
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Florida Bar -- Rules -- Amendment -- Continuing education -- Florida registered paralegals -- Lecture credit
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Florida Bar -- Rules -- Amendment -- Reinstatement to membership -- Amendment to rules -- Exemptions from filing and review requirement -- Confidentiality -- Generally -- Practice after graduation -- Duty to update -- Bylaw authorizing electronic meetings
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Insurance -- Property -- Insured's action against insurer -- Conditions precedent -- Presuit notice -- Retroactive application of statute -- Section 627.70152, which requires insureds to file a written notice of intent to initiate litigation with the Department of Financial Services as a condition precedent to suit, does not apply retroactively to insurance policies issued prior to date statute went into effect because statute does not include clear evidence of intent to apply retroactively
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Rules of Traffic Court -- Amendment -- Practice as in criminal rules -- Speedy trial
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Trusts -- Trustees -- Pro se filings -- Trustee, who is not an attorney, may not represent trust in court proceeding because doing so would constitute unauthorized practice of law -- Although trust instrument prohibits attorney representation of trust, terms of trust instrument cannot legally authorize representation by a non-attorney
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 -- Evidence -- Video -- Statements of defendant -- Interpreters -- Due process clauses of federal and state constitutions do not require that certified interpreter be used when state admits videos of recorded interview that was conducted with an interpreter who was not certified -- Trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting videos after determining that there were sufficient safeguards to ensure reliability of translation -- Community officer who served as interpreter testified that she was fluent in Spanish and was confident she had accurately translated defendant's statements; CSO had no investigative role; interview was recorded and available to defense counsel before trial, allowing counsel an opportunity to review and challenge accuracy of translation; and nothing in record indicated that interpreter was biased or had any interest in outcome of case
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Sexual activity with minor -- Evidence -- DNA -- Double jeopardy -- Convictions on count charging appellant with sexual activity with child by person in familial or custodial authority and five counts charging lewd and lascivious molestation of child and lewd and lascivious conduct affirmed -- Trial court did not err in admitting testimony of state's DNA expert -- Appellant's challenge to reliability of expert's methodology, made in context of larger argument that police department crime lab's testing methods were outdated, goes to weight rather than admissibility of expert's testimony, and trial court's determination at Daubert hearing that expert's methodology remained reliable and that expert's testimony was admissible was well within its discretion -- Confrontation of witnesses -- Trial court did not violate defendant's right to confront witnesses by allowing chief medical officer of child protection team to provide testimony regarding victim's medical examination report, which had been prepared by a nurse practitioner who no longer worked for CPT -- Discussion of U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Smith v. Arizona -- Smith does not govern case at issue where chief medical examiner offered no opinions and testified only to the procedures employed in victim's examination and CPT protocol for such examinations, and report did not make any findings or forensic conclusions -- Even if Confrontation Clause error did occur, error was not fundamental where chief medical examiner's testimony did not reach down into validity of trial so deeply that guilty verdict would have been unobtainable without alleged error -- Post conviction relief -- Trial court did not err in denying rule 3.850 motion alleging that multiple convictions constituted a double jeopardy violation where each offense charged was a distinct criminal sexual act
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Sexual battery -- Mentally defective victim -- Trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing mentally defective victim to testify at trial while holding a teddy bear -- Plain language of section 92.55(5) allows trial courts to set conditions it finds just and appropriate when taking testimony of a person with an intellectual disability in any proceeding involving a sexual offense -- Jury trial -- Six-person jury -- Under current precedent, defendant's trial by six-person jury was not unconstitutional -- Appellate court declines to hold section 913.10 unconstitutional based on U.S. Supreme Court's grant of certiorari in Kain v. Florida
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Sexually violent predators -- Involuntary civil commitment under Jimmy Ryce Act -- Relocation -- Mandamus -- No abuse of discretion in denying mandamus petition seeking relocation to another dormitory based on alleged physical threats from fellow detainees -- Petitioner does not have a clear legal right to a different dormitory where he has not shown a particularized threat that would enable civil commitment center to conclude that petitioner faces a strong likelihood, rather then a mere possibility, of serious harm -- Allegation that petitioner has already been struck in the face is insufficient where petition does not indicate the extent of the injury, whether strike was legally excused, and whether, as a result, petitioner faces serious future harm -- Civil commitment center's failure to move petitioner to his desired dormitory despite his repeated requests does not constitute deliberate indifference toward petitioner's safety
VIEW OPINION (login required)