VIRGIL HARRIS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
VIRGIL HARRIS, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
394 So. 2d 485
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1981)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. McCloud v. State, 335 So. 2d 257 (Fla.1976); Corbo v. State, 347 So. 2d 133 (Fla.3d DCA), cert. denied 354 So. 2d 979 (Fla.1977); Griffin v. State, 335 So. 2d 348 (Fla.2d DCA 1976); cf. Mahaun v. State, 377 So. 2d 1158 (Fla.1979).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United Auto. Ins. Co. v. Salgado, 22 So. 3d 594 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…policy change by way of case law. Additionally, this Court, along with others, has stated that an insurer’s denial of coverage under section 627.409 is “a viable defense even in the absence of effective cancellation.” Motors Ins. Corp. v. Woodcock, 394 So. 2d 485, 488 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). In Motors Insurance Corp. v. Marino, 623 So. 2d 814 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), this Court held that an insurer’s failure to comply with section 627.728’s cancellation procedure did not waive the insurer’s right to rescind the polic…
-
Home Ins. Co. & N. River Ins. Co. as subrogees for Athlone Indus., Inc. v. C & G Sporting Goods, Inc., 453 So. 2d 121 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)…s not competent to prove the negative. See Independent Fire Insurance Company v. Horn, 343 So. 2d 862, 864 fn. 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). Had C & G conclusively established that it had not received the notices, Motors Insurance Corporation v. Woodcock, 394 So. 2d 485 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1981), seems to suggest that C & G would have met its initial burden such that it would have then been incumbent upon plaintiffs to show by affidavit or other competent summary judgment proof that the notices had been mailed to C & G.…
-
Rafferman v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 659 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…a rest” and (b) that he had “heard ... but [didn't] remember exactly” that a second crewmember had told still a third one— neither of whom testified — to watch Letelier because he was acting "in a strange manner.” See Motors Ins. Corp. v. Woodcock, 394 So. 2d 485, 488 n. 4 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Page v. Staley, 226 So. 2d 129, 130 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969). Even taking this wildly uncertain evidence at face value, however, does not assist the plaintiff because neither incident reflects any indication of the vital ele…
Authorities Cited
- McCLOUD v. State, 335 So. 2d 257 (Fla. 1976)
- Mahaun v. State, 377 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. 1979)
- Wodford v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2024)
- Blas Jesus Corbo v. State, 347 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Griffin v. State, 335 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)