Simone Marstiller

In Oakes v. State, Jason Hardy Oakes appealed his conviction for false imprisonment after a domestic violence incident in which he argued with, struck, and pinned his girlfriend to the floor. He contended the trial court should have granted his motion for judgment of acquittal because the evidence failed to prove he confined or restrained the victim against her will. The appellate court affirmed the conviction, concluding that the victim's testimony about being pinned by the appellant's knees on her shoulders while being hit and choked met the statutory definition of false imprisonment under section 787.02(1)(a), Florida Statutes. The court reasoned that even temporary forcible restraint of movement, without lawful authority, satisfies the elements of the offense, as supported by prior case law requiring only minimal force to restrict freedom.

criminal law

The case concerned consolidated appeals from orders by the Northwest Florida Water Management District dismissing administrative challenges by Washington County and a land trust to the District's 2008 Region III Regional Water Supply Plan under section 373.709(5), Florida Statutes. The plan identified inland groundwater development as one water supply project option, which later factored into a separate consumptive use permit application by Bay County. The court reversed the District's ruling that the plan could never be challenged under chapter 120 but affirmed the dismissal of the petitions for lack of standing. It reasoned that while the statute permits challenges to plan portions affecting substantial interests, the plan itself had no direct legal effect on the appellants' interests or on their ability to contest the permit in separate proceedings, failing the Agrico standing test.

environmentprocedure

The case involved a mother appealing a circuit court order that adjudicated her two minor children dependent and placed them in the custody of the Department of Children and Families, based on allegations including the mother's substance abuse, exposure to domestic violence, educational and dental neglect, and psychological instability. The Department of Children and Families had petitioned for dependency after removing the children from the home, and the trial court found by a preponderance of the evidence that the children faced a substantial risk of imminent abuse or neglect. The appellate court reversed the adjudication, holding that none of the trial court's findings were supported by competent, substantial evidence under Florida statutes defining abuse, abandonment, and neglect. The court specifically determined that the evidence failed to establish a present or imminent threat of harm to the children from the mother's alcohol and drug use, the domestic violence, the lack of dental care, or her self-harm behavior.

family law

In Lewis v. Morgan, Jerry Lewis was arrested by Escambia County Sheriff's deputies for grand theft after a car dealership reported him for failing to return a vehicle when financing fell through on the purchase contract. Lewis had the criminal charge dismissed and then sued the sheriff for false arrest and malicious prosecution; the trial court dismissed those claims without prejudice, finding that the complaint itself showed probable cause for the arrest, and later denied leave to file an amended complaint adding claims for abuse of process and invasion of privacy. The District Court of Appeal held that the trial court correctly dismissed the initial claims but abused its discretion by denying amendment, because Lewis was not bound by the prior allegations and could potentially state valid causes of action in a new pleading. The court therefore reversed the dismissal with prejudice and remanded for further proceedings. The decision rested on Florida rules allowing amendment of complaints and the principle that probable cause defeats false arrest and malicious prosecution claims.

criminal lawproceduretorts & liability

In Greenwade v. State, the defendant appealed his conviction for cocaine trafficking after officers executing a search warrant found nine bags of white powder that the defendant admitted contained cocaine, along with a digital scale and a residue-covered spoon; the bags were field-tested, their contents combined without individual lab testing, and the resulting mixture weighed 234.5 grams and tested positive for cocaine. The court affirmed the conviction on the trafficking charge, concluding that the state's evidence was sufficient to prove possession of 200 to 400 grams of cocaine or a cocaine mixture. The reasoning emphasized the defendant's admissions, the tools of the drug trade found nearby, the field tests, and the statutory language allowing for mixtures, which together permitted the jury to infer that all bags contained contraband meeting the weight threshold.

criminal law

This case was a medical malpractice appeal arising from a birth injury lawsuit in which the plaintiff alleged that an obstetrician negligently used a vacuum extractor multiple times during delivery, causing an ischemic stroke and cerebral palsy in the infant. After a jury trial, the defendants prevailed with a verdict finding no negligence that caused injury to the child, and the trial court entered final judgment accordingly. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, holding that the trial court properly excluded causation-related testimony from the plaintiff's standard-of-care expert because he lacked qualification to opine on that issue, and that defense experts' references to supporting studies did not amount to improper bolstering of their opinions.

torts & liabilityhealthcare

This case involved divorced parents disputing child support obligations for their adult son Alex, who has a severe seizure disorder and is mentally incompetent; the mother, as primary caregiver, sought increased support to cover respite nursing care after the father refused payment. The trial court granted the request, ordering the father to pay for ten hours of weekly respite care plus one forty-hour week annually at $45 per hour by a registered nurse, plus reimbursement for past expenses. The appellate court affirmed, holding that such respite care qualifies as an extraordinary medical expense under Florida Statute 61.30(11)(a)1 and that the son's deteriorating condition justified the modification as a substantial change in circumstances. The court distinguished the father's reliance on Kuttas v. Ritter, noting that the need for professional medical relief was case-specific and not solely tied to relocation or visitation issues.

family lawhealthcare

In this workers' compensation case, claimant Marie Glinski, who had received permanent total disability benefits since 1990, failed to fully complete an earnings report form requested by the employer/carrier despite multiple opportunities, omitting information about social security and other income. The employer/carrier suspended her benefits from December 21, 2009, to January 15, 2010, after she did not provide the required details, and the Judge of Compensation Claims denied her subsequent petition for those benefits, finding willful noncompliance. Glinski appealed, arguing lack of evidence of willful failure and that the employer/carrier lacked authority to suspend judicially awarded benefits without further adjudication. The court affirmed the denial, holding that the evidence supported the finding of willful failure under section 440.15(l)(e)2.b., Florida Statutes (1983), and that the statute's plain language permitted the employer/carrier to suspend payments independently until a complete report was submitted.

labor & employment

In this case, Terrell Dubose was convicted of first-degree felony murder, with burglary as the underlying felony, and shooting or throwing deadly missiles after he and his brothers entered a fenced residential yard without permission, fired 29 bullets into the house, and killed an eight-year-old girl. Dubose appealed, arguing that the burglary statute was unconstitutionally vague as applied because it does not define curtilage, that he could not be guilty of burglary because the yard was not fully enclosed, and that the trial court improperly limited cross-examination of a prosecution witness about potential uncharged crimes. The court affirmed the convictions, holding that the as-applied constitutional challenge was not preserved for appeal, that the partial chain-link fence around the yard satisfied the enclosure requirement for curtilage under Florida law, and that the trial court acted within its discretion in limiting the cross-examination because there was no evidence of additional undisclosed deals with the witness. The decision rested on statutory definitions of dwelling and curtilage, prior precedent on enclosure requirements, and rules governing impeachment of witnesses for bias.

criminal lawprocedureproperty

The case involved a firefighter/paramedic seeking workers’ compensation benefits for a left ankle injury sustained while exercising on an elliptical machine during his shift in January 2010, which he attributed to prior work-related accidents in 2002, 2005, and 2009. The Judge of Compensation Claims denied the claim, finding no medical evidence linking any of the incidents to the injury. On appeal, the court affirmed the denial, holding that a decision against the party with the burden of proof need not be supported by competent substantial evidence. The court noted that neither of the claimant’s physicians could opine with reasonable medical certainty that his employment caused or was the major contributing cause of the ankle condition, as they lacked concrete information about any prior injuries.

labor & employment

The case involved a dispute within the First Baptist Church of Micanopy over a shift from congregational to elder-led governance, during which certain members and officers were removed and bylaws amended. The ousted plaintiffs sued the church and its leaders for breach of fiduciary duty, claiming violations of the articles of incorporation and bylaws in the removal, election, and amendment processes. The trial court dismissed the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, deeming it an ecclesiastical matter. On appeal, the court affirmed, holding that resolving the claims would require interpreting church doctrine and governance principles protected by the First Amendment, with no clean separation possible from the religious issues involved.

religious libertyprocedure

Michael Flowers appealed his life sentence for aggravated battery with a firearm, arguing that section 775.087(2)(a)3, Florida Statutes, limits the minimum mandatory term to twenty-five years rather than permitting a life term. The court affirmed the sentence, relying on the Florida Supreme Court's decision in Mendenhall v. State. Under that precedent, the statute gives trial courts discretion to impose a minimum mandatory term ranging from twenty-five years to life when a firearm is discharged causing great bodily harm during an enumerated felony, and this range applies even if it exceeds the offense's statutory maximum.

criminal lawguns

The case involved Theodore Freeman's appeal of his convictions for selling cocaine within 1,000 feet of a church and possessing cocaine. At trial, after the defense cross-examined a detective to elicit that Freeman had denied involvement in the drug sale, the trial court allowed the State to introduce evidence of Freeman's three prior felony convictions to impeach that out-of-court statement, even though Freeman did not testify. The appellate court affirmed the convictions, holding that the defense had opened the door to impeachment under Florida evidence rules by introducing the defendant's exculpatory hearsay statement through another witness. The court reasoned that such statements can be impeached with prior convictions just as in-court testimony could be, and a limiting instruction minimized any prejudice.

criminal lawprocedure

This case is an appeal from a Florida divorce judgment in which the former wife challenged the trial court's rulings on property division and child support. The appellate court affirmed the judgment, holding that the wife failed to preserve her argument that a 159-acre tract conveyed by quitclaim deed was her non-marital asset. The court further found no abuse of discretion in awarding the property entirely to the former husband after considering the marriage's short length and his contributions, or in setting child support based on the parties' financial affidavits.

family lawproperty

In Cook v. Palm Beach County School Board, the claimant filed a petition for worker’s compensation benefits seeking payment of five medical bills for treatment received from an authorized doctor for a 1994 work injury. The employer/carrier moved for summary final order, asserting that the request involved a reimbursement dispute over which the Judge of Compensation Claims lacked jurisdiction. The JCC granted the motion, and the appellate court affirmed. The court found no genuine issue of material fact as to the doctor’s authorization status, since the employer/carrier had not received the bills earlier and paid them once obtained. Under section 440.13, Florida Statutes, any disagreement over payment for medical treatment constitutes a reimbursement dispute subject to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Department of Financial Services.

labor & employmentprocedure

The case involved an employee discharged from her housekeeping job for repeated absences and tardiness, who then sought unemployment compensation benefits under Florida law. The appeals referee and Unemployment Appeals Commission found her disqualified because the absences constituted misconduct under section 443.036(29), Florida Statutes, as they demonstrated willful disregard of employer interests after warnings. The court affirmed, holding that while some absences for workers' compensation therapy may have been authorized, the record showed multiple other unauthorized absences that continued despite verbal warnings, supporting the finding of misconduct. The Commission's interpretation of the statute was deemed not clearly erroneous.

labor & employment

This case is the first 'Engle progeny' individual lawsuit following the Florida Supreme Court's decertification of a class action against cigarette manufacturers, in which Matilde Martin sued R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company for negligence, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, and related claims after her husband died from smoking-related illnesses. The trial court awarded compensatory and punitive damages to the plaintiff, and RJR appealed, arguing that the prior Engle Phase I findings were given overly broad preclusive effect, that reliance was not proven on the fraud claim, and that the punitive damages were excessive and unconstitutional. The appellate court affirmed the judgment in full, holding that the Engle findings properly established the conduct elements of the claims via res judicata, that Martin presented sufficient independent evidence of causation, detrimental reliance, and entitlement to punitive damages, and that the punitive award satisfied due process given the evidence of prolonged misconduct and the company's financial condition.

torts & liabilitybusiness & regulatory

Kennis Schummer was convicted in 1993 of racketeering, grand theft, and unlawful financial transaction and ordered to pay $22,759 in restitution to the victim, Gulf Coast Audio Visual Producers, Inc. After obtaining a civil judgment against Gulf Coast that included offsets from a counterclaim, Schummer sought to declare the restitution paid in full by set-off, but the trial court denied the motion. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the civil setoffs did not constitute amounts paid to or collected by Gulf Coast and thus did not satisfy the restitution obligation under section 775.089(8), Florida Statutes, even though the civil judgment could concurrently address both obligations.

criminal lawprocedure

The case involved a firefighter for the City of Pembroke Pines who was diagnosed with hypertension during a required physical exam in 2005, received initial workers' compensation benefits including medical treatment under the presumption in section 112.18, Florida Statutes, and then returned to full duty after a brief period of light duty. The employer/carrier stopped paying for ongoing treatment in 2009, arguing that benefits were limited to the short period of disability. The Judge of Compensation Claims ruled that benefits must continue, and the appellate court affirmed. The core reasoning was that section 112.18 establishes compensability for the occupational disease once the presumption applies, after which chapter 440 requires employers to provide medically necessary care for as long as the condition causes a need for treatment, without conditioning payment on ongoing disability.

labor & employment

The Department of Health petitioned for review of a nonfinal discovery order in an administrative license disciplinary proceeding against podiatrist Kenneth D. Poss, D.P.M., which required the Department's expert witness to produce documents from prior investigations. The Administrative Law Judge had ordered production of certain correspondence and opinion letters, including those involving other practitioners. The court held that the ALJ erred in compelling production of confidential investigative records concerning other health care practitioners where no probable cause had been found and no confidentiality waiver occurred, because section 456.073(10), Florida Statutes, exempts such records from disclosure and the physicians' privacy interests outweighed Dr. Poss's need for cross-examination materials given other available discovery. However, the court allowed production of records related to Dr. Poss himself, as his discovery request constituted a waiver of confidentiality. The petition was therefore granted in part and denied in part, directing the ALJ to limit the order accordingly.

healthcareprocedure