JEFFREY PARNELL, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• HAM v. Dunmire, 891 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 2004)
  …lesser sanction. The trial court’s failure to consider the Kozel factors in determining whether dismissal was appropriate is, by itself, a basis for remand for application of the correct standard. See Warren v. Shands Teaching Hosp. & Clinics, Inc., 700 So. 2d 702, 705 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (remanding to the trial court for consideration in light of the Kozel factors of whether good cause existed for serving complaint outside of the 120-day time period). We instruct the trial court to consider the Kozel factors…
• Bryant v. State, 901 So. 2d 810 (Fla. 2005)
  …l court granted plaintiff twenty days to amend the complaint); Haas v. Roe, 704 So. 2d 1117, 1117 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) (noting that the trial court granted plaintiff thirty days to amend the complaint); Warren v. Shands Teaching Hosp. & Clinics, Inc., 700 So. 2d 702, 703 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (noting that the trial court granted plaintiff ten days to amend the complaint); Freeman v. Mintz, 523 So. 2d 606, 608 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (noting that the trial court granted plaintiff twenty days to amend the complaint); Mu…
• Smith v. City OF Fort Myers & Lee Cnty., 944 So. 2d 1092 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
  …aised as an alternative basis for affirmance by the City as an appellee. This court’s reversal on an entirely different basis does not mean that it considered the City’s “Tipsy Coachman” argument. See Warren v. Shands Teaching Hasp. & Clinics, Inc., 700 So. 2d 702, 704 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (holding that an alternative ground for affirmance was not necessarily decided and thus did not trigger the doctrine of law of the case). Because the issue of standing was not actually decided on appeal, the City is not barr…

Authorities Cited

• State v. Woodley, 695 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 1997)