THOMAS J. KELLY, APPELLANT,
v.
IRVING G. MCNAYR, 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.
The Florida District Court of Appeal vacated its prior judgment and affirmed the lower court's final judgment after the Florida Supreme Court quashed the appellate court's initial decision. This case illustrates the hierarchical nature of judicial review, where a higher court's ruling dictates the outcome of a lower appellate court.
The District Court of Appeal must vacate its previous judgment and adopt the Florida Supreme Court's opinion and judgment as its own, thereby affirming the final judgment of the lower court.
“quashed this court's judgment and remanded the cause for further proceedings not inconsistent with the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida”
This quote explains the action taken by the Florida Supreme Court that necessitated the current ruling by the District Court of Appeal.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe District Court of Appeal had previously reversed a final judgment from the Circuit Court. However, the Florida Supreme Court reviewed this decisio…
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 Mandate cases and more on FLexlaw
Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on May 25, 1965 (175 So.2d 568) reversing the final judgment of the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; and
Whereas, on review of this court’s judgment by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion and judgment filed March 23, 1966 (184 So.2d 428) and mandate dated April 11, 1966, now lodged in this court, quashed this court’s judgment and remanded the cause for further proceedings not inconsistent with the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida;
Now, therefore, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court issued in this cause on June 15, 1965 is withdrawn, the opinion and judgment of this court filed May 25, 1965 is vacated, the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court and the final judgment appealed from in this cause is affirmed. Costs allowed shall be taxed in the circuit court (Rule 3.16(b) Florida Appellate Rules, 31 F.S.A.).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mueller v. THE Florida BAR, 390 So. 2d 449 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…atteo, 360 U.S. 564, 79 S.Ct. 1335, 3 L.Ed.2d 1434 (1959). As the latter case points out, the privilege extends only to words or acts within the scope of the authority of the public servant. Ward v. Allen, 11 So. 2d 193 (Fla.1942); Saxon v. Knowles, 185 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966); Knight v. Starr, 275 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973). We have previously distinguished absolute privilege from the concept of sovereign immunity. Cobbs Auto Sales, Inc. v. Melvin Coleman, 353 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). Artic…
-
Palm Beach Cnty. Health Care Dist. v. Prof'l Med. Educ., Inc., 13 So. 3d 1090 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)…ote the February 23, 2000 letter. Because the liability of the District on the defamation count is predicated on its status as Davis’s employer, the absolute immunity of Davis “necessarily requires the exoneration” of the District. Saxon v. Knowles, 185 So. 2d 194, 196 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966); see Bauer v. [*1096] City of Gulfport, 195 So. 2d 571, 573 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967); Murphy v. City of Aventura, No. 08-20603-CIV, slip op. at 5 n. 3, 2008 WL 4540055 (S.D.Fla. Oct. 10, 2008); Medina v. City of Hialeah, No. 02-20…
-
Crowder v. Barbati, 987 So. 2d 166 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)…S.Ct. 1335, 3 L.Ed.2d 1434 (1959)). “As the latter case points out, the privilege extends only to words or acts within the scope of the authority of the public servant.” Id. (citing Ward v. Allen, 152 Fla. 82, 11 So. 2d 193 (1942); Saxon v. Knowles, 185 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966); Knight, 275 So. 2d at 37). Where the official acts “within the scope of their office” that official enjoys “an absolute privilege.” Mueller, 390 So. 2d at 451. Mueller held that immunity applied to a press release issued by the…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- McNAYR v. Kelly, 184 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 1966)
- Kelly v. McNAYR, 175 So. 2d 568 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)