BETTYE PITTMAN, PETITIONER,
v.
PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, ET AL., RESPONDENTS
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.
The Florida Supreme Court quashed the First District Court of Appeal's decision in Pittman because it relied on the Murray precedent, which the Supreme Court had itself quashed, and remanded for reconsideration in light of the corrected Murray standard.
A lower court decision that relies on a precedent subsequently quashed by the Supreme Court must be quashed and remanded for reconsideration under the correct legal standard.
[1] When a lower court decision relies on a precedent subsequently quashed by the Supreme Court, the lower court decision must be quashed and remanded for reconsideration und…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe First District Court of Appeal decided Pittman while its Murray v. Mariners Health/ACE USA decision was pending review in the Florida Supreme Cour…
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 Remand For Reconsideration cases and more on FLexlaw
We have for review Pittman v. Palm Beach County School District, 972 So.2d 1042 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008), in which the First District Court of Appeal cited as authority its decision in Murray v. Mariners Health/ACE USA, 946 So.2d 38 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006), quashed, 994 So.2d 1051 (Fla.2008). When the First District issued its decision in Pittman, its Murray decision was pending review in this Court. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § (3)(b)(3), Fla. Const.; Jollie v. State, 405 So.2d 418 (Fla.1981).
We stayed proceedings in this case pending our disposition of Murray v. Mariner Health, 994 So.2d 1051 (Fla.2008), in which we quashed the First District’s underlying Murray decision. When our decision in Murray became final, we issued an order directing respondents in the present case to show cause why we should not accept jurisdiction, summarily quash the decision being reviewed, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Murray. Upon review of respondents’ response and petitioner’s reply thereto, we have determined to so proceed.
Accordingly, we grant the petition for review in this case, quash the decision below, and remand for reconsideration upon application of our decision in Murray.
It is so ordered.
QUINCE, C.J., and WELLS, PARIENTE, LEWIS, CANADY, POLSTON, and LABARGA, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1981)
- Murray v. Mariner Health and ACE USA, 994 So. 2d 1051 (Fla. 2008)
- Schwanda v. Woodbine Indus., Inc., 946 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- State Farm Fla. Ins. Co. v. King, 972 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)