ISAAC SMITH, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By (17 total)

• Baptist Hosp., Inc. v. Baker, 84 So. 3d 1200 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
  …v. Butland, 951 So. 2d 860, 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). In order to assert a claim for damages under FDUTPA, the 'plaintiff must establish: “(1) a deceptive act or unfair practice; (2) causation; and (3) actual damages.” Kia Motors Am. Corp. v. Butler, 985 So. 2d 1133, 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). Actual damages are “the difference in the market value of the product or service in the condition in which it was delivered and its market value in the condition in which it should have been delivered according to the contr…
• Porsche Cars N. Am., Inc. v. Diamond, 140 So. 3d 1090 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)
  …ious ways, but the allegations and facts establish Distributor does not design or manufacture the vehicles, Porsche does. . This opinion does not reach the issue of whether such a theory of damages is viable. Compare Kia Motors Am. Corp. v. Butler, 985 So. 2d 1133, 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); with Dorestin v. Hollywood Imps., Inc., 45 So. 3d 819, 825-32 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (Gross, J„ concurring specially). . The United States Supreme Court recently echoed this sentiment: What matters to class certification ...…
• Leibell v. Miami-Dade Cnty., 84 So. 3d 1078 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)
  …h of these elements in turn. A. TYPICALITY Rule 1.220(a)(3) requires the claims of the representative party be typical of the claims of the class. This element focuses on the sufficiency of the named plaintiffs, see Kia Motors Am. Corp. v. Butler, 985 So. 2d 1133, 1136 n. 3 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008), and the relationship between their claims and the class’s claims, see State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Kendrick, 822 So. 2d 516, 517 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). On this element, it is not sufficient for the plaintiff to have…

Authorities Cited

• Donnell Quarterman v. State, 876 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)