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 -- Purchase agreements -- Condominiums -- Cancellation -- Timeliness -- Ambiguity -- Parol evidence -- Trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of condominium buyers after considering extrinsic evidence to construe an ambiguous provision in condominium purchase and sale agreement and determining that buyers timely exercised their right of cancellation of purchase agreement, entitling buyers to return of their deposit -- Language of an addendum to purchase and sale agreement that assigned the contract to a new buyer contained a patent ambiguity as to effective date of agreement and resulting cancellation deadline -- Trial court erred at the summary judgment phase in considering extrinsic evidence to cure a patent ambiguity, an ambiguity that appeared on face of document and was not born out of any extraneous fact -- Existence of a patent ambiguity precludes consideration of parol evidence for any purpose other than to clarify issues regarding identity, capacity, or the parties' relationship with one another
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Estates -- Wills -- Challenge -- Testamentary capacity -- Summary judgment -- No error in entering summary judgment against grandson's challenge to will which was executed by 100-year-old grandfather two months before his death and disinherited grandson -- No material issues of fact existed concerning testator's testamentary capacity -- Even accepting as true expert's affidavit stating that testator was suffering from an underlying dementia with delirium from the month before will was executed until testator's death, statement does not meet grandson's burden to overcome the presumption that testator was lucid when he executed will -- Absence in expert's affidavit of a fact-based chain of reasoning explaining that testator's condition prevented him from experiencing the lucid intervals reported by the other witnesses is determinative -- Mere possibility that a testator did not have testamentary capacity at time will was signed does not satisfy heavy burden of overcoming the presumption of testamentary capacity at trial, and is similarly insufficient at summary judgment
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Jurisdiction -- Non-residents -- Foreign corporations -- General jurisdiction -- Business contacts in state -- Trial court erred in denying defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction after non-evidentiary hearing where defendant provided supporting affidavits that adequately rebutted complaint's jurisdictional allegations and plaintiffs failed to provide sworn proof that a basis for general jurisdiction existed -- Business contacts in state are not sufficient to confer general jurisdiction over foreign corporation unless those contacts “are so ‘continuous and systematic' as to render [the corporation] essentially at home in the foreign state” -- Without more, even significant in-forum business contacts do not support exercise of general jurisdiction -- Mere existence of website accessed by Florida users does not establish general jurisdiction over foreign corporation -- Allegations that defendant manufactured vehicles, parts, and equipment and provided services for at least seven authorized dealerships in Florida, marketed its image to Florida customers through its website, sold branded museum tickets to Florida-based customers, hosted annual dealer meeting in Florida, and had executives present for races in Florida, even if sufficient to allege general jurisdiction, were adequately rebutted by defendant's supporting affidavit
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Torts -- Defamation -- Public figure -- Actual malice -- Media defendants -- Anti-SLAPP statute -- Limitation of actions -- Presuit notice -- Ancillary torts -- Single-action rule -- Action arising from allegedly defamatory statements defendants made about plaintiff on their radio broadcasts or in connection with such broadcasts -- Trial court erred in dismissing defamation cause of action pursuant to Anti-SLAPP statute where defamation claims were not based solely on defendants' protected public speech -- Discussion of public speech in context of radio broadcasts or other similar work -- Although trial court made assumption that alleged defamatory statements reflected a mere public feud carried out on air and in related media, complaint contained allegations regarding statements that were not made on social media or in a radio broadcast -- Amended complaint refuted defendants' claims that they did not publish certain alleged defamatory statements -- Assuming plaintiff was a public figure, plaintiff made sufficient allegations of actual malice -- Defamation action was not entirely barred by statute of limitations, as at least two of the alleged defamatory statements appear to have been made during two-year limitations period -- Presuit notice requirements -- Although defendant was radio broadcaster, not every statement he made fell within scope of section 770.01's requirements that media defendants receive notice before defamation suit is initiated -- Trial court erroneously applied single action rule as basis for dismissing ancillary tort claims against defendants where amended complaint suggests that some of the ancillary claims were not based on allegedly defamatory publications -- On remand, trial court should reexamine sufficiency of allegations as to ancillary tort counts -- Civil procedure -- Discovery -- Trial court had discretion to stay discovery pending ruling on motion to dismiss, but should reexamine stay order on remand
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 -- Juveniles -- Aggravated assault -- Juvenile could not be found guilty of aggravated assault as a permissive lesser included offense of attempted armed robbery with deadly weapon where delinquency petition alleged that juvenile carried a firearm during attempted robbery, not that he assaulted victim with firearm -- Error was fundamental -- On remand, delinquency court may consider whether evidence was sufficient to find that juvenile committed assault under section 784.011
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Possession of firearm by convicted felon -- Judgment of acquittal -- Trial court erred in denying motion for judgment of acquittal where state did not introduce certified copy of defendant's prior felony conviction at trial and no other evidence of his convicted felon status was admitted -- Stipulation by counsel was not sufficient in absence of on-the-record colloquy of defendant -- Error was fundamental
VIEW OPINION (login required)