WATSON REALTY CORPORATION, A FLORIDA CORPORATION; TERRI MURPHY; CLAUDE B. MCCRANIE, JR.; DELORES MCCRANIE, PETITIONERS,
v.
THOMAS F. QUINN AND NANCY A. QUINN, HIS WIFE, RESPONDENTS
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Greater Weight Of The Evidence Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioners seek review of Watson Realty Corp. v. Quinn, 435 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) on the ground of conflict with Canal Authority v. Ocala Manufacturing, Ice and Packing Co., 332 So. 2d 321 (Fla.1976). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. This case presents a question of law as to whether, in an action for fraud, the required standard of proof is the “greater weight” of the evidence or “clear and convincing” evidence. The district court held that the standard was the greater weight, distinguishing language to the contrary in Canal Authority as obiter dicta. We agree. The correct statement of the law is in Rigot v. Bucci, 245 So. 2d 51 (Fla.1971), where we explicitly addressed this question and receded from earlier case law holding that clear and convincing evidence was the correct standard. Blaeser Development Corp. v. First Federal Savings and Loan Association, 375 So. 2d 1118 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). We accept jurisdiction in order to recede from the obiter dicta in Canal Authority.
The decision of the district court is approved.
It is so ordered.
ALDERMAN, C.J., and ADKINS, BOYD, OVERTON, McDONALD, EHRLICH and SHAW, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wieczoreck v. H & H Builders, Inc., 475 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 1985)…tly are of no precedential value. 245 So. 2d at 53. We hereby recede from that portion of the Canal Authority opinion to the extent it announces a rule of law contrary to that expressed in Rigot. We recently so held in Watson Realty Corp. v. Quinn, 452 So. 2d 568 (Fla.1984). By agreement the parties have stipulated that “this cause be dismissed pursuant to a settlement.” We retained jurisdiction for the sole purpose of answering the certified question. Nothing in our opinion today shall be taken to affect t…1 / 2
-
Canaveral Port Auth. v. Dep't OF Revenue, 690 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 1996)…mployees Relations Act. See National Union v. Southeast Volusia Hosp. Dist., 436 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Southeast Volusia Hosp. Dist. v. National Union of Hosp. & Health Care Employees, 429 So. 2d 1232 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), review dismissed, 452 So. 2d 568 (Fla.1984); Hitt v. North Broward Hosp. Dist., 387 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). Finally, special districts are subject to the government-in-the-sunshine law. News-Press Publishing Co. v. Carlson, 410 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). In light of th…
-
Cowan Liebowitz & Latman, P.C. v. Kaplan, 902 So. 2d 755 (Fla. 2005)…t prohibition against assignment of legal malpractice claims. Therefore, we accepted jurisdiction. Cowan Liebowitz & Latman, P.C. v. Kaplan, 844 So. 2d 645 (Fla.2003) (table); see art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const; see also Watson Realty Corp. v. Quinn, 452 So. 2d 568, 569 (Fla.1984) (accepting jurisdiction based on conflict between the district court opinion and dictum in a prior Supreme Court case and receding from the dictum). For the reasons explained below, we approve the district court’s decision. [*757] We…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Rigot v. Bucci, 245 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 1971)
- The Canal Auth. of the State of Fla. v. Ocala Mfg., 332 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 1976)
- Blaeser Dev. Corp. v. First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n OF Martin Cnty., 375 So. 2d 1118 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)
- Watson Realty Corp. v. Quinn, 435 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)