Notable Florida Decisions

Legal malpractice claims are non-assignable under Florida law, and judgment creditors who received assignments of such claims from bankruptcy trustees lack standing to pursue those claims in state court.

A father's parental rights may be terminated for abandonment when he makes almost no effort to maintain a relationship with his child, even when incarcerated, if he fails on appeal to adequately challenge the trial court's factual findings regarding the frequency and substance of his contact efforts.

A trial court errs in awarding unliquidated damages against a defaulted defendant without a properly noticed damages trial in compliance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.440 and without an evidentiary hearing where the damages cannot be determined with exactness or arithmetic calculation from the pleadings.

Summary judgment was improper on the concrete columns issue because genuine disputes of material fact existed regarding whether the columns exceeded the scope of the easement right to "landscaping" and whether they violated town laws or ordinances, which Appellees never identified or proved.

The federal Graves Amendment and Florida Statute § 324.021(9)(c)3 immunize a motor vehicle dealership from vicarious liability for negligent operation of a temporary loaner vehicle provided to a service customer whose vehicle is being repaired, where the dealership obtained the driver's license and insurance information from the customer.

A child's momentary action of walking away from a police officer for a few seconds, followed by immediate compliance and cessation of movement when the officer approached, does not constitute sufficient evidence of resistance or obstruction of a lawful duty under Florida Statute § 843.02.

A party seeking a trial de novo following non-binding arbitration complies with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.820(h) when it timely files a document that provides notice of rejection of the arbitration decision and requests a trial de novo, even if the document does not expressly use the phrase "notice of rejection." The use of the indefinite article "a" in rule 1.820(h) indicates that no specific form of notice is required, and a document requesting a trial de novo from a particular arbitration award constitutes sufficient notice of rejection under the plain and reasonable reading of the

A juvenile offender sentenced to more than 15 years under section 775.082(1)(b)(2) for first-degree murder without killing is entitled to a sentence review after 15 years, and a juvenile offender sentenced to more than 20 years under section 775.082(3)(c) for life felonies is entitled to a sentence review after 20 years.

An email public records request is objectively received when it enters the custodian's email system, and unjustified delay in producing nonexempt public records violates the Public Records Act without requiring proof of knowing or willful conduct by the custodian.

Valid disclaimers executed under Florida Statute § 739.104 preclude heirs from claiming any interest in foreclosure surplus proceeds, and such disclaimers are not subject to the additional requirements imposed by § 45.033(3) for voluntary transfers, as inheritance transfers are involuntary transfers governed by disclaimer law.

A party seeking a trial de novo following non-binding arbitration complies with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.820(h) when it timely files a document that provides notice of rejection of the arbitration decision and requests a trial de novo, even if the document does not expressly use the phrase "notice of rejection." The use of the indefinite article "a" in rule 1.820(h) indicates that no specific form of notice is required, and a document requesting a trial de novo from a particular arbitration award constitutes sufficient notice of rejection under the plain and reasonable reading of the

An attorney who files appellate briefs containing hallucinated legal citations generated by artificial intelligence without verification violates Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.045(d), 9.210(b)(5), and 9.410(a), as well as Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.515(d), and is subject to sanctions including monetary fines, attorney's fee awards to the opposing party, and referral to the state bar. The existence of some legitimate authority or correct legal propositions in a brief does not negate the harm caused by false and hallucinated cases and does not excuse

Florida Statutes § 99.061(7)(a)1., requiring candidates to pay qualifying fees via checks drawn on campaign accounts, applies to municipal elections when the municipality's charter contains no conflicting provision addressing the payment method. A charter provision that is silent on the source of payment does not supplant an express statutory requirement.

When a defendant's resistance to arrest flows from a single continuous episode with no temporal break, intervening act, or change in criminal intent, multiple convictions for resisting arrest without violence constitute a double jeopardy violation, even if multiple officers are involved.

A marital settlement agreement provision stating that alimony shall remain in effect until the former wife remarries does not constitute an express or implied waiver of the statutory right to seek modification of alimony based on changed circumstances. An effective waiver requires clear, exclusive language stating that modification is precluded or that remarriage is the sole basis for termination.

Summary judgment was properly granted for Burgess because Art Connections failed to establish that Burgess made a misrepresentation of material fact and failed to show reasonable reliance on any alleged misrepresentation. Burgess consistently identified the painting as "Les Cirque" in all communications and provided a detailed invoice clearly naming the painting sold.

An order granting a new trial must be supported by a record demonstrating that complained-of conduct prejudiced the moving party and resulted in a miscarriage of justice; isolated incidents cured by prompt judicial action, limited non-substantive juror discussions, and absence of extrinsic influence do not satisfy this standard.

An insurance company's nominal settlement offer is made in good faith when the offeror has a reasonable foundation for the offer based on the insured's breach of policy conditions, such as failure to provide prompt notice and failure to submit required documents. The focus of the good faith analysis is the substance of the reasons for the nominal offer, not the timing of when the offer is made.

The evidence was insufficient to support convictions for attempted first-degree murder because the State failed to prove premeditation—a fully formed conscious purpose to kill that existed for a sufficient time to permit reflection. Firing six shots at a moving vehicle from 50-60 feet away, without evidence of specific intent to kill the occupants, prior threats, or preconceived plan, does not establish premeditation. The evidence was sufficient to support convictions for attempted second-degree murder as to all four occupants, as firing six rounds at an occupied moving vehicle constitutes an

The insured's sickness commenced during the policy coverage period on March 28, 2022, when the neurosurgeon first informed the insured of the immediate need for spinal fusion surgery to prevent loss of bowel and bladder control, not when the insured had prior back pain or earlier diagnostic tests. The sickness was unforeseeable because the insured did not know he would need surgery before the policy became effective and did not learn of the significant risks of postponing surgery until after coverage commenced. The pre-existing condition exclusion does not bar recovery because the condition ne

A circuit court commits structural error when it appoints a plenary guardian while bypassing the mandatory statutory requirement to consider less restrictive alternatives and fails to make specific, contemporaneous factual findings that a ward's valid preneed designation is contrary to the ward's best interests. Court-appointed counsel's assessment of a preneed designee's suitability cannot substitute for the independent judicial finding required by statute, and counsel must advocate for the ward's expressed wishes rather than substitute counsel's own judgment. A circuit court violates procedu

Valid disclaimers executed under Florida Statute Chapter 739 eliminate an heir's right to inherit the owner's property interest and therefore preclude any claim to foreclosure surplus proceeds. Disclaimers need not comply with section 45.033(3) because involuntary transfers by inheritance are governed by ordinary inheritance laws, not the conditions precedent imposed on voluntary transfers.

Trial courts must consider evidence of domestic violence in custody modification proceedings and must specifically acknowledge in writing that such evidence was considered when evaluating the best interests of the child, regardless of whether the court grants or denies relief.

A motion to vacate a void dismissal order entered in violation of a bankruptcy automatic stay may be filed years after entry, as the passage of time cannot validate a void order.

A stay of execution entered by a trial court is automatically dissolved upon issuance of an appellate mandate, rendering a subsequent appeal challenging the stay moot.

Where a trial court's written sentencing order conflicts with the oral pronouncement regarding prosecution costs, the oral pronouncement controls.

A father's parental rights may be terminated for abandonment when he makes almost no effort to maintain a relationship with his child, even when incarcerated, if he fails on appeal to adequately challenge the trial court's factual findings regarding the frequency and substance of his contact efforts.

A pro se litigant who files more than sixty pleadings including approximately thirty repetitive and frivolous motions seeking identical relief, despite warnings and prior denials, abuses the judicial process and may be prohibited from further pro se filings and required to appear through licensed counsel.

An award of attorney's fees and costs predicated on a reversed or vacated judgment must itself be reversed, and the matter must be remanded for reconsideration of both entitlement and amount based on the actual prevailing party status determined by the merits appeal.

The trial court properly denied the motion to quash service of process where the counterclaim, despite ambiguous wording, was directed solely against the defendant in his capacity as trustee rather than in his personal capacity.