BRICKELL PLACE ASSOCIATION, APPELLANT,

v.

CHEEZEM DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Orthenell Alfredo Russell v. State, 614 So. 2d 605 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
  …C.A., Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, rule 11(e)(6), and 28 U.S.C.A., Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 410. . See United States v. Brooks, 536 F. 2d 1137, 1138 (6th Cir.1976), fn. 1, and cases therein cited. . The court held in Clark v. State, 452 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 2d DCA1984), that the improper admission of evidence of statements in violation of section 90.410, and rule 3.172(h), could not be deemed harmless under the facts of that case. Said the court: Admittedly, there was ample evidence from which t…
• Dawson v. State, 585 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
  …559 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (quoting State v. Trujillo, 93 N.M. 724, 727, 605 P. 2d 232, 235 (1980)). Additionally, allowing admission of evidence of prior plea negotiations leaves an “indelible impression of guilt on the jurors’ minds.” Clark v. State, 452 So. 2d 1002, 1004 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). We agree that “the purpose of § 90.410 is of such importance that ... violation of that section cannot be deemed harmless.” Landrum, 430 So. 2d at 550. Next, appellant contends that it was error for the court to admit the…
• Brickell Place Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Am. Design & Dev. Corp. OF Miami & Cheezem Dev. Corp., 470 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
  …PER CURIAM. Our earlier affirmance on rehearing of the trial court’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s complaint,1 see Brickell Place Association v. Cheezem Development Corp., 452 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (on rehearing), brought to an end the trial court’s jurisdiction to consider the plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint. See Mackin v. Applestein, 404 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Marans v. Stang, 124 So. 2d 891 (Fla. 3d DCA…

Authorities Cited

• Dania Jai-Alai Palace, Inc. v. Sykes, 450 So. 2d 1114 (Fla. 1984)