NEW ENGLAND INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
INTERNATIONAL BANK OF MIAMI, N.A., APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
New England Insurance Company appealed issues already decided in a prior appeal to the same court. The court affirmed its previous decision and declined to reconsider the same issues between the same parties, applying the law of the case doctrine.
A party is not permitted a second appeal on issues decided in a previous appeal. The law of the case doctrine applies between the same parties concerning the same issues and facts, and a per curiam decision with citations of authority constitutes the law of the case between the parties.
[1] A per curiam decision of an appellate court, even if consisting only of citations of authority, constitutes the law of the case between the same parties on the same issue…
[2] The law of the case doctrine determines all issues necessarily involved in a prior appeal, whether explicitly mentioned in the court's opinion or not.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Even though it consists only of citations of authority without further explanation, a per curiam decision of the appellate court is the law of the case between the same parties on the same issues and facts, and determines all issues necessarily involved in the appeal, whether mentioned in the court's opinion or not.”
Establishes that per curiam decisions are binding law of the case even without detailed explanation
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNew England Insurance Company had previously appealed against International Bank of Miami, N.A. in 1987, resulting in a per curiam decision. New Engla…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Law Of The Case Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
BASKIN, Judge.
Appellant New England Insurance Company asks us to revisit issues already decided in a previous appeal. New England Ins. Co. v. International Bank of Miami, N.A., 514 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 108 S.Ct. 1293, 99 L.Ed.2d 503 (1988).
We decline to do so. Even though it consists only of citations of authority without further explanation, a per curiam decision of the appellate court is the law of the case between the same parties on the same issues and facts, and determines all issues necessarily involved in the appeal, whether mentioned in the court’s opinion or not. Rogers v. State ex rel. Bd. of Pub. Instruction of Alachua County, 156 Fla. 161, 23 So. 2d 154 (1945); see also South Fla. Hosp. Corp. v. McCrea, 118 So. 2d 25 (Fla.1960); Red Carpet Corp. v. Roberts, 443 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983), review denied, 488 So. 2d 68 (Fla.1986); State Comm’n on Ethics v. Sullivan, 430 So. 2d 928 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 436 So. 2d 101 (Fla.1983); cf. Dade County Classroom Teachers’ Ass’n v. Rubin, 238 So. 2d 284 (Fla.1970) (matters inherent in district court’s opinion become part of the law of the case), cert. denied, 400 U.S. 1009, 91 S.Ct. 569, 27 L.Ed.2d 623 (1971); Alford v. Summerlin, 423 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (matters implied in district court’s opinion become part of the law of the case).
A subsequent presentation of proof regarding an issue already decided does not introduce a different issue. Cf. Valsecchi v. Proprietors Ins. Co., 502 So. 2d 1310 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (although issue framed differently on second appeal, as long as facts and parties upon which the first decision was based remain the same, the law of the case doctrine applies to preclude second appeal); Howell v. Howell, 207 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968) (law of the case applies between same parties concerning same agreement and same issues as in first appeal, if the facts before the court are the same as those in the first appeal).
Appellant is not permitted a second appeal on issues decided in a previous appeal. Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. Carol Fla. Corp., 154 So. 2d 339 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 157 So. 2d 819 (Fla.1963).
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
Lane Mitzenmacher v. Mitzenmacher, 656 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…e court is the law of the case between the same parties on the same issues and facts, and determines all issues necessarily involved in the appeal, whether mentioned in the court’s opinion or not. New England Ins. Co. v. International Bank of Miami, 537 So. 2d 1025 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), and cases cited therein. [*180] The criteria for an award of temporary alimony and permanent alimony are precisely the same, namely, the need of the spouse requesting the alimony and the ability of the other spouse to pay. Canaka…
-
Kenneth and Yvonne Pompi v. City OF Jacksonville, 872 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…panied only by the statement, “Affirmed,” is the law of the case. See Canty v. State, 715 So. 2d 1033, 1033 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Comm’n on Ethics v. Sullivan, 430 So. 2d 928, 932 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); New England Ins. Co. v. Int’l Bank of Miami N.A., 537 So. 2d 1025, 1025-1026 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Russell v. Florida Ranch Lands, Inc., 441 So. 2d 190, 191 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). An affirmance, even if unexplained, is a decision on the merits of the case. That is not true, however, with respect to a dismissal. By it…
-
Floriselva Silva v. U.S. Sec. Ins. Co., 734 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…D446, D447, 729 So. 2d 412, 1999 WL 71766 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); see also Canty v. State, 715 So. 2d 1033, 1033 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Sloane v. Sloane, 625 So. 2d 1236, 1237 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); New England Ins. Co. v. International Bank of Miami, N.A., 537 So. 2d 1025, 1025-26 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).2 This is so even where this court specifically was not asked to reach the issues presented here during the Silva I appeal. See S/D Enters., Inc. v. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., 375 So. 2d 1109, 1111 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979) (ho…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (17 total)
- Howell v. Howell, 207 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)
- John and Janet Valsecchi v. Proprietors Ins. Co., 502 So. 2d 1310 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Wing v. Missouri, 400 U.S. 1009 (U.S. 1971)
- Hardin v. Harry H. Price & Sons, Inc., 400 U.S. 1009 (U.S. 1971)
- Kirkland v. Fla. Dep't of Corr., 2006 WL 3755195 (N.D. Fla. 2024)
- S. Fla. Hosp. Corp. v. McCREA, 118 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 1960)
- Oscar's Lounge, Inc. v. Dep't of Bus. Reg., 430 So. 2d 928 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- RED Carpet Corp. OF Panama City Beach v. B.K. Roberts, 443 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
- Dade Cnty. Classroom Teachers' Ass'n, Inc. v. Rubin, 238 So. 2d 284 (Fla. 1970)
- Petroleum Carrier Corp. v. Standard OIL Co. OF Ky., 156 Fla. 161 (Fla. 1945)