text:
    James v. City of Jacksonville/City of Jacksonville Risk Management
    1D16-4599
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Judge of Comp. Claims


source: Caselaw Access Project

license: Public Domain

text:
    James v. State
    1D17-1939
    07/10/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Jenkins v. State
    1D17-1937
    07/10/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Jernigan v. State
    1D16-5303
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    John v. State
    1D17-0870
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Johnigan v. State
    1D17-1484
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Johnson v. State
    1D17-1112
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Johnson v. State
    1D17-1708
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Johnson v. State
    1D17-0847
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Johnson v. State
    1D17-1474
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Washington)


text:
    Jones v. State
    1D17-1835
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Jones v. State
    1D16-5772
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Jordan v. State
    1D17-1090
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Joyce v. Board of Trustees of Pensacola State College
    1D17-0153
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Junkin v. State
    1D16-1239
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Kelly v. Bank of New York Mellon Corporation for GWMBS, Inc., Alternative Loan Trust 2002-7 Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2002-11
    1D16-3134
    07/06/2017
   Dism.

Cir. Ct. (Nassau)


text:
    Kelly v. Forest River, Inc.
    1D16-4081
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Ala-chua)


text:
    King v. State
    1D16-4392
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Koenigstein v. State
    1D16-1821
    07/10/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Ala-chua)


text:
    Kunkel v. State
    1D16-5774
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir; Ct, (Escam-bia)


text:
    L.W. v. State
    1D16-4233
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Liberty)


text:
    Landry v. State
    1D17-1928
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Lane v. State
    1D17-1448
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Lee v. State
    1D16-3127
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bradford)


text:
    Leslie v. State
    1D17-0497
    09/29/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Escam-bia)


text:
    Lige v. State
    1D17-1828
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Llano Financing Group, LLC v. Henderson
    1D16-3618
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Baker)


text:
    Logue v. State
    1D17-0985
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bay)


text:
    Lott v. State
    1D17-1012
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Lowrey v. Lakeview Condominium Owners Association, Inc.
    1D16-102
    08/07/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Walton)


text:
    M.R. v. Florida Department of Children and Families
    1D17-1325
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Gilchrist)


text:
    Macklin v. State
    1D16-2278
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Mangrum v. State
    1D16-4577
    09/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Taylor)


text:
    Markham v. State
    1D17-1204
    09/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Ala-chua)


text:
    Martin v. State
    1D17-0958
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Martin v. State
    1D16-0170
    10/04/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bay)


text:
    Mayfield v. Mayfield
    1D16-4176
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    McKennie v. State
    1D17-1181
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Means v. State
    1D17-0879
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Columbia)


text:
    Miller v. State
    1D16-0229
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Mims v. State
    1D17-1624
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct.-(Ala-chua)


text:
    Minor v. State
    1D17-0867
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Mitchell v. State
    1D16-0126
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Moore v. Florida Department of Corrections
    1D17-0443
    07/14/2017
   Mand.den.


text:
    Moore v. Walmart Stores, Inc.
    1D17-671
    07/12/2017
   Cert.dism.


text:
    Morales v. Morales
    1D16-3536
    07/07/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Morgan v. State
    1D16-3959
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Morgan v. State
    1D16-3958
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Morgan v. State
    1D16-3956
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Duval)


text:
    Morris v. State
    1D17-2044
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Duval)


text:
    Murdy v. State
    1D17-1030
    07/14/2017
   Aff,

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Murphy v. State
    1D16-990
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    N.F. v. Department of Children and Families
    1D17-2130
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Madison)


text:
    Neely v. State
    1D17-1472
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    NE 32nd Street, LLC v. State Department of Environmental Protection
    1D17-2178
    07/24/2017
   Cert.dism.


text:
    Oreskovich v. State
    1D17-1333
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Ala-chua)


text:
    Pate v. State
    1D17-1791
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Patterson v. State
    1D17-1503
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Escam-bia)


text:
    Paul v. State
    1D17-0208
    07/18/2017
   Belated App. den.


text:
    Pearson v. State
    1D17-1055
    07/24/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Columbia)


text:
    Perry v. State
    1D16-4150
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct, (Leon)


text:
    Pierce v. State
    1D16-2760
    09/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bay)


text:
    Porter v. State
    1D17-1279
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Leon)


text:
    Prince v. State
    1D16-1132
    08/24/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Ricks v. State
    1D17-1968
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bay)


text:
    Roberson v. State
    1D17-0783
    09/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Madison)


text:
    Roberts v. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission
    1D16-5506
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Reemployment Assistance Apps. Com'n


text:
    Robertson v. Robertson
    1D16-4912
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Santa Rosa)


text:
    Robertson v. State
    1D17-1929
    08/23/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Okaloo-sa)


text:
    Rodriguez v. Department of Children and Families
    1D17-951
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Dept, of Children and Families


text:
    Salameh v. State
    1D17-2061
    07/10/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Sales v. State
    1D16-5551
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Scarboro v. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission
    1D17-0441
    07/07/2017
   Aff.

■Reemployment Assistance Apps. Com’n


text:
    Scott v. State
    1D16-3483
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Scott v. State
    1D17-2088
    07/12/2017
   Hab.Corp.dism.


text:
    Scott v. State
    1D15-5272
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Scuderi v. State
    1D17-1534
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Shaver v. State
    1D16-4067
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Shelton v. State
    1D17-1093
    09/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct, (Duval)


text:
    Showers v. State
    1D17-1714
    08/16/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Silas v. State
    1D17-0849
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Silvers v. State
    1D17-1973
    08/16/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Small v. State
    1D17-1844
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Ala-chua)


text:
    Smith v. State
    1D17-1721
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Smith v. State
    1D15-4536, 1D15-4537
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Spees v. State
    1D17-0006
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Taylor)


text:
    Starling v. State
    1D16-3475
    09/15/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Stephens v. State
    1D16-1847
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Okaloo-sa)


text:
    Steward v. State
    1D17-1456
    08/31/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Stewart v. State
    1D16-5049
    08/23/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam- . bia)


text:
    Stokes v. State
    1D17-1533
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Santa Rosa)


text:
    Strain v. State
    1D16-5056
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Stratton v. State
    1D16-4990
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Sullivan v. State
    1D16-1995
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct, (Leon)


text:
    T.O.C. v. Bethany Christian Services
    1D16-3419
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Tanner v. State
    1D16-3253
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Taylor v. City of Lakeland Office of Risk Management/Retail First Insurance Company.
    1D17-0351
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Judge of Comp. Claims


text:
    Taylor v. State
    1D17-1034
    08/30/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Ala-chua)


text:
    Terry v. Florida Commission on Offender Review
    1D1D16-5489
    09/15/2017
   Cert. den.


text:
    Theiss v. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission
    1D16-4639
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Reemployment Assistance Apps. Com'n


text:
    Thomas v. State
    1D16-4715
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Thompson v. State
    1D17-1278
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Tucker v. State
    1D17-1644
    07/12/2017
   Belated App. dism,


text:
    Turner v. State
    1D17-0925
    08/23/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    V.P. Gainesville South, LLC v. City of Gainesville
    1D16-4253
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Ala-chua)


text:
    Wagner v. State
    1D17-0449
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Okaloo-sa)


text:
    Walker v. State
    1D16-808
    07/07/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Warner Harrell Plantation, LLC v. CenterState Bank of Florida, N.A.
    1D16-5251
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Suwan-nee)


text:
    Washington v. Washington
    1D16-1339
    08/30/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Washington v. Washington
    1D16-2124
    08/30/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Webb v. Baxter’s Realty, Inc.
    1D15-5047
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bay)


text:
    Webb v. State
    1D15-3160
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Santa Rosa)


text:
    Webb v. State
    1D17-1607
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Santa Rosa)


text:
    Webster v. Florida Department of Corrections
    1D16-5832
    09/15/2017
   Aff.

Cir: Ct. (Leon)


text:
    Weed v. State
    1D16-4190
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Baker)


text:
    Weger v. State
    1D16-4339
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Wells v. State
    1D17-1461
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Welsh v. State
    1D17-1445
    08/31/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Westbrooks v. State
    1D17-1326
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Wethy v. State
    1D16-4786
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Union)


text:
    White v. State
    1D16-4325
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Whiting v. State
    1D16-4046
    07/07/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Williams v. State
    1D16-1406
    07/07/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Escam-bia)


text:
    Williams v. State
    1D16-4389
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Duval)


text:
    Williams v. State
    1D17-2324
    08/23/2017
   Belated App. den.


text:
    Wright v. State
    1D16-1370
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Nassau)


text:
    SECOND DISTRICT
    Anthony v. State
    2D16-5491
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Pinel-las)


text:
    Ball v. Ball
    2D16-4607
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Pinel-las)


text:
    Bank of the Ozarks v. Bray
    2D17-2726
    07/27/2017
   App.dism.


text:
    Banks v. State
    2D16-443, 2D16-444
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Pinel-las)


text:
    Barrs v. State
    2D16-4945
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Collier)


text:
    Baumgartner v. Sabal Trust Company
    2D16-4250
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Manatee)


text:
    Bennetts v. State
    2D16-4354
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Polk)


text:
    Bingham v. State
    2D16-387
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Pinel-las)


text:
    Booska v. State
    2D16-3748
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Collier)


text:
    Borland v. State
    2D17-410
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Manatee)


text:
    Brown v. State
    2D16-5321
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Polk)


text:
    Brown v. State
    2D16-5134
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Cano v. State
    2D16-3903
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Chandler v. SAP Public Services, Inc.
    2D16-2002
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Polk)


text:
    Chavers v. State
    2D16-5170
    07/12/2017
   Aff,

Cir. Ct. (Polk)


text:
    Chesser v. State
    2D16-5291
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Collins v. State
    2D17-526
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Danzey v. State
    2D17-532
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    David v. State
    2D15-2889
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Polk)


text:
    Devonwood Homeowners' Association, Inc. v. Katemand LLC
    2D16-2490
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Pasco)


text:
    Doeden v. State
    2D15-4726
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Lee)


text:
    Edwards v. State
    2D16-5317
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Maria-tee)


text:
    Everett v. State
    2D16-5133
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Ferrer v. State
    2D16-3610
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Polk)


text:
    Ferrer v. State
    2D16-5471
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Polk)


text:
    Geraurd v. State
    2D16-5338
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Polk)


text:
    Giraldo v. State
    2D16-557
    07/12/2017
   Aff,

Cir. Ct, (Lee)


text:
    Greene v. State
    2D16-4197
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Polk)


text:
    Guilford v. State
    2D16-5300
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Howell v. U.S. Bank National Association
    2D16-3933
    07/28/2017
   Dism.

Cir. Ct, (Sarasota)


text:
    Hughes v. State
    2D16-4614
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Pinel-las)


text:
    Hulcher v. State
    2D17-454
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Polk)


text:
    Huntley v. State
    2D16-814
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    In re Guardianship of Marcantonio; Marcantonio v. Central Florida Senior Solutions, Inc.
    2D16-1251, 2D16-3514, 2D16-4500
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct, (Polk)


text:
    In Interest of B.D.; J.C. v. Department of Children and Families
    2D17-153
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Pasco)


text:
    In Interest of B.R.C.; W.C. v. J.E.M.
    2D16-5298
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Pasco)


text:
    In Interest of D.D.; D.D. v. Department of Children and Families
    2D17-1476
    07/12/2017
   Cert,den,

Cir. Ct, (Pasco)


text:
    In Interest of E.H.; A.H. v. Department of Children and Families
    2D17-701
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Manatee)


text:
    In Interest of M.H.; S.E. v. Department of Children and Families
    2D17-592
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    In Interest of N.L.V.; L.V. v. Department of Children and Families
    2D17-1684
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Lee)


text:
    In Interest of N.R.; L.M. v. Department of Children and Families
    2D17-1512
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Charlotte)


text:
    In Interest of S.S.; S.S. v. Department of Children and Families
    2D17-665
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    In Interest of S.S.; A.C. v. Department of Children and Families
    2D17-743
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    In Interest of T.C.; K.C. v. Department of Children and Families
    2D17-1119
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Pinel-las)


text:
    J.E.S. v. State
    2D16-2081
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Lee)


text:
    J.M. v. State
    2D15-5573
    07/12/2017
   Aff.'

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Jenkins v. State
    2D16-3469
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Charlotte)


text:
    Joe v. State
    2D16-5448
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Pasco)


text:
    Kaufman v. Edgefield Holdings, LLC
    2D17-143
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Polk)


text:
    Koster v. State
    2D16-5521
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Charlotte)


text:
    Latinkic v. State
    2D17-281
    07/14/2017
   Cert.den.

Cir. Ct, (Polk)


text:
    Lucanegro v. State
    2D17-1847
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Charlotte)


text:
    Luciano v. State
    2D16-3186
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Saraso' ta)


text:
    Maxwell v. State
    2D16-4393
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Polk)


text:
    McCray v. State
    2D16-5485
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Charlotte)


text:
    McKelly v. State
    2D16-4852
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Manatee)


text:
    Newsome v. State
    2D16-5520
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Pinel-las)


text:
    Oberman v. U.S. Bank National Association
    2D16-1281
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Lee)


text:
    Olmedo v. State
    2D16-2261
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Pasco)


text:
    Panarees v. State
    2D16-1587
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Pastor v. State
    2D16-5277
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Lee)


text:
    Petz v. State
    2D16-5400
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Pasco)


text:
    Placida Sas, LLC v. St. Laurent
    2D16-3145
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Com’n on Human Rel.


text:
    Powell v. State
    2D16-5430
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Manatee)


text:
    R.B. v. State
    2D16-1748
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Ramos v. State
    2D16-5240
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Collier)


text:
    Redmond v. State
    2D14-4435
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Roblero v. State
    2D16-4827
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Manatee)


text:
    Rubinstein v. State
    2D15-5399
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Sarasota)


text:
    Sanders v. State
    2D16-5172
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Sirias v. State
    2D16-5070
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Lee)


text:
    Smith v. U.S. Bank National Association for MASTR Asset Backed Securities Trust 2006-WMC2, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-WMC2
    2D16-159
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    State v. Harris
    2D15-3841
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Pasco)


text:
    State v. Mingo
    2D16-3750
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Stephens-Vicens v. State
    2D16-5325
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Sarasota)


text:
    Torres v. State
    2D16-5181
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Turbi v. State
    2D16-5349
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Polk)


text:
    Turner v. State
    2D16-3754
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Manatee)


text:
    US Quality Homes, LLC v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company for GSAA Home Equity Trust 2007-5
    2D16-3376
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Vilbon v. Christiana Trust, a Division of Wilmington Saving Funds Society, FSB for Stanwich Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2013-3
    2D16-4858
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Collier)


text:
    Vilchis v. State
    2D16-2218
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Collier)


text:
    Watson v. State
    2D16-5092
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Pinel-las)


text:
    Welch v. State
    2D16-5421
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    Wilcoxson v. State
    2D16-2910
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Lee)


text:
    Williams v. State
    2D17-794
    07/12/2017
   Aff.-

Cir. Ct. (Hills-, borough)


text:
    Young v. GEICO General Insurance Company
    2D16-471
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Hills-borough)


text:
    THIRD DISTRICT
    A.R. v. State
    3D16-2522
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    A.S. v. State
    3D16-2648
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Adams v. State
    3D16-177
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Alexander v. State
    3D17-1120
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Balmaseda v. Okay Insurance Exchange of America, LLC
    3D16-2633
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Barbary v. State
    3D17-1183
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    C.M. v. State
    3D17-0630
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    C.P-L. v. State
    3D16-2377
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Campbell v. EverBank
    3D17-702
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Cardelle v. HSBC Bank USA, National Association
    3D16-2277
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Cardenas v. State
    3D17-1278
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Claude v. State
    3D17-1166
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Contreras v. Bank of New York Mellon
    3D16-2481
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Diaz v. State
    3D16-844
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Donoso v. Bank of America, N.A.
    3D16-665
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Escobar v. State
    3D17-1123
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Ferro v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company
    3D16-2561
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Monroe)


text:
    Godhigh v. State
    3D17-1199
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Griggs v. State
    3D17-1335
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Hinh Quang Tran v. State
    3D16-1690
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Monroe)


text:
    Hussey v. State
    3D15-2860
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Ibarra v. First Franklin Financial Corporation
    3D16-1532
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Iturriaga v. Department of Children and Families
    3D16-1342
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Dept, of Children and Families


text:
    J.I. v. State
    3D16-1950
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Jenkins v. State
    3D16-192
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Johnson v. State
    3D17-1295
    07/26/2017
   Aff,

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Jones v. State
    3D17-1226
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Karim v. Jaclyn Investments of South Florida, Inc.
    3D16-871
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    L.R. v. State
    3D17-0650
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Ladaker v. State
    3D15-1221
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Mack v. HSBC Bank USA, National Association
    3D16-2197
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)'


text:
    Ortiz v. State
    3D17-1116
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Parnell v. State
    3D17-1189
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Pike v. Pike
    3D16-1055
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Monroe)


text:
    Prudent v. State
    3D16-9
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Q.B. v. State
    3D16-2599
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Rodriguez v. State
    3D17-1117
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Rodriguez v. State
    3D16-534
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Royal v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC
    3D17-684
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Sajous v. HMC Assets, LLC
    3D16-1605
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Screme v. State
    3D17-502
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Shaw v. State
    3D16-2930
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Silver v. State
    3D15-2478
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Simon v. State
    3D17-707
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    SDE Media, LLC v. City of Doral
    3D16-2008
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Vantrepotte v. Benoit
    3D16-2271
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Monroe)


text:
    Warring v. McCormick 105, LLC
    3D15-2577
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Watkins v. State
    3D17-1225
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Whitt v. US Bank, NA
    3D16-924
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    Wilson v. State
    3D16-2529
    07/26/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Miami-Dade)


text:
    FOURTH DISTRICT
    Abraham v. U.S. Bank National Association for Benefit of Harbor View 2005-16 Trust Fund
    4D16-2716
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Aguiar v. State
    4D16-1294
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Alerte v. State
    4D17-990
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Amicon v. State
    4D17-1169
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro1 ward)


text:
    Angulo v. State
    4D16-3813
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Antonoff v. State
    4D16-3055
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Arellano-Medrano v. State
    4D17-1375
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Okeechobee)


text:
    Armstrong v. State
    4D17-627
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. 'Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Arnold v. School Board of Broward County
    4D16-1692
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

School Bd. of Broward


text:
    B.S. v. Department of Children and Families
    4D17-932
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Lu-cie)


text:
    Barbour v. State
    4D17-856
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Baron v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
    4D16-3503
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Baxter v. St. John
    4D16-327
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Bell v. Federal National Mortgage Association
    4D16-1784
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Bilello v. Bank of New York Mellon for Certificateholders of CWALT, INC., Alternative Loan Trust 2006-OA16, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-OA16
    4D14-4312
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Boca Grand Condominium Association, Inc. v. Osorio
    4D16-3011
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Bonilla v. Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
    4D16-1635
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Bowman v. Brusca
    4D16-2078
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Braconi v. State
    4D17-1308
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Briggs v. State
    4D16-1749
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Lu-cie)


text:
    Brown v. State
    4D15-3766
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Brown v. State
    4D17-438
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian ' River)


text:
    Brown v. State
    4D16-2045
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian River)


text:
    Bryant v. State
    4D17-1112
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian River)


text:
    Budd v. Budd
    4D16-1300
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Burgos v. State
    4D15-160
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Butler v. State
    4D17-1874
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Campbell v. State
    4D17-1765
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Cannon v. State
    4D16-1995
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Cartagena v. State
    4D17-0919
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Castillo v. State
    4D15-2486
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Clarke v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC
    4D16-1886
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Condominium Owners Organization of Century Village East, Inc. v. Ventnor B Condominium Association, Inc.
    4D16-2620
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Craig v. State
    4D17-729
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Crittendon v. State
    4D16-0880, 4D16-0881
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian River)


text:
    D.W. v. State
    4D16-4057
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    D’Amico v. State
    4D17-588
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Dalco 84, LLC v. 2520 Miami RD Capital, LLC
    4D16-1785
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Damergi v. Loayza-Damergi
    4D16-1050
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Del Castillo v. Madle
    4D17-561
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Depre v. State
    4D15-3300
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Edward v. State
    4D16-1624
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Edwards v. State
    4D17-0706
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Federated National Insurance Company v. Koberling
    4D16-3407
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Flanagan v. State
    4D16-2277
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Floyd v. State
    4D17-1622
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Formica v. Formica
    4D17-634
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Foster v. Lawnwood Medical Center, Inc.
    4D16-3381
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Lu-cie)


text:
    Francis v. CIT Bank, N.A.
    4D16-0500
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Fraternal Order of Police Lodge #42 v. City of Plantation
    4D16-3120
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

■Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Friedman v. Persaud
    4D16-925
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Garcia v. State
    4D16-1971
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Gaskin v. State
    4D16-2667
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian River)


text:
    Gibson v. State
    4D17-1037
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Goheagan v. Perkins
    4D16-2220
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Gonzalez v. State
    4D15-4800
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Griggs v. State
    4D16-3836
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian River)


text:
    Guadalupe v. State
    4D16-1246
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Guadalupe v. State
    4D16-3195
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Guardacosta v. State
    4D17-760
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    H.R. v. State, Department of Children and Families
    4D17-585
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Hager v. State
    4D16-4030
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Lu-cie)


text:
    Hardy v. State
    4D17-1813
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Harris v. State
    4D16-2724
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Hicks v. State
    4D17-908
    07/13/2017
   Aff,

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Hill v. State
    4D16-1093
    07/13/2017
   Aff,-

Cir. Ct. (St. Lu-cie)


text:
    Holloman v. State
    4D17-0684
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (St. Lu-cie)


text:
    Holmes v. State
    4D17-1173
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Hughes v. State
    4D17-1638
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Huot v. State
    4D16-2910
    07/13/2017
   Aff

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    In re A.C.S.
    4D17-962
    07/12/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    J.A.S. v. State
    4D16-3146
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Jackson v. State
    4D17-461
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Lu-cie)


text:
    Jallali v. Christiana Trust, a Division of Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB for Normandy Mortgage Loan Trust, Series 2013-15
    4D17-380
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Jenkins v. State
    4D16-980
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Palm Beach)


text:
    Johnson v. Constantin
    4D16-3354
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Indian River)


text:
    Jones v. Jones
    4D16-4059
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    K.S. v. Department of Children and Families
    4D17-1358
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian River)


text:
    Kenon v. State
    4D17-1033
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Kline v. State
    4D14-1738
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Kritikos v. Andersen Builders, Inc.
    4D15-4000
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    KMS Restaurant Corp. v. Katzman Wasserman Bennardini & Rubinstein, P.A.
    4D16-3664
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Lakeside Green Homeowners' Association No. 5, Inc. v. Responsible Reality, LLC.
    4D16-3581
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Lemus v. State
    4D15-3919
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Lester v. State
    4D17-217
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian River)


text:
    Luongo v. Gomez
    4D16-3004
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian River)


text:
    Luxama v. State
    4D17-412
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Lyles v. State
    4D17-1541
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Lu-cie)


text:
    M & M Realty Partners, LLC v. Mazzoni
    4D16-2658
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Marante v. Fils-Aime
    4D16-27
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Palm Beach)


text:
    Martinez v. Bank of New York Mellon
    4D16-2398
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Palm Beach)


text:
    McEachern v. Bank of New York Mellon
    4D16-1303
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Meltzer v. Ward-Kuhn
    4D16-4320
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian River)


text:
    Menga v. State
    4D17-785
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Moncada v. City of Coral Springs
    4D16-2622
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Moore v. Arch Bay Holdings, LLC, Series 2009B
    4D16-3042
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Mumford v. Mumford
    4D16-488
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Nappi v. State
    4D17-1273
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian River)


text:
    Osbourne v. State
    4D16-1292
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Osorio v. State
    4D15-2208
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Palmer v. State
    4D17-926
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Perez v. State
    4D16-4243
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Perkins v. State
    4D17-0322
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Pittman v. State
    4D17-1339
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Progressive American Insurance Company v. W.M. ex rel. Weaver
    4D15-1194, 4D15-1349
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    R.L. v. State
    4D16-3517
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    R.W. v. Department of Children & Families
    4D17-483, 4D17-613
    07/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Raciunas v. Encore Fund Trust 2013-1
    4D15-3874
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Raymond v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ex rel. Harborview Mortgage Loan Trust Mortgage Loan Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-1
    4D16-4016
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Rigueiro v. State
    4D16-2118
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Rodriguez v. Deutsche Bank National Trust
    4D16-2187
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Rodriguez v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC
    4D16-3465, 4D16-3466
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Rodriguez v. State
    4D16-3458
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Lu-cie)


text:
    Rogers v. HSBC Bank USA, National Association for Benefit of People’s Financial Realty Mortgage Securities Trust, Series 2006-1, Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-1
    4D15-3975
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Salvanto v. Fifth Third Mortgage Company
    4D13-4400
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Sanchez v. State
    4D16-658
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Scalia v. HMC Assets LLC
    4D16-1926
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Shaw v. State
    4D16-3957, 4D16-3966
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Ship v. Lariviere
    4D17-602
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Shipman v. State
    4D16-3569
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Lu-cie)


text:
    Simmons v. State
    4D15-4804
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

• Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Smith v. Innova Investment Group, LLC
    4D15-4727
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Smith v. State
    4D17-314
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm . Beach)


text:
    Smith v. State
    4D17-1695
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (St. Lu-cie)


text:
    Sosa v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ex rel. Harborview 2006-12 Trust Fund
    4D16-1367
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    State v. Blackledge
    4D15-1990
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    State v. Castro
    4D16-2459
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    State v. Moss
    4D16-2522
    07/19/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Stockero v. State
    4D16-4051
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Stovall v. State
    4D16-1869
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Lu-cie)


text:
    Stovall v. State
    4D15-4238
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    T.A. v. State
    4D16-3058
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian River)


text:
    Thaysen v. State
    4D16-4033
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Indian River)


text:
    Thomas v. State
    4D17-1142
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Thomas v. State
    4D17-1240
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Thomas v. State
    4D16-601
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Thompson v. State
    4D16-3217
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Thompson v. State
    4D16-1195
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Thornton v. State
    4D17-1365
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Martin)


text:
    Tolbert v. State
    4D17-1302
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Torres v. State
    4D15-3029
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Tucker v. State
    4D16-0395, 4D16-0396
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Vargas v. State
    4D17-1184
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Walker v. State
    4D16-610
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Walter v. Lopez
    4D16-2300
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    West v. State
    4D15-2162
    07/06/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Wilson v. State
    4D16-884
    07/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Palm Beach)


text:
    Wiltons Bier Garden v. Quisenberry
    4D16-3697
    07/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    Wimberly v. State
    4D16-4076
    07/20/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bro-ward)


text:
    FIFTH DISTRICT
    Abbott v. State
    5D16-3837
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Acree v. State
    5D17-1328
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Alexander v. State
    5D17-1850
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Allen v. State
    5D17-346
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Seminole)


text:
    Alls v. Gosa
    5D16-4030
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Anderson v. Anderson
    5D16-4231
    08/22/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Aquino v. State
    5D16-3766
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Avery v. State
    5D16-2819
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Barsalou v. State
    5D16-2720
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Volu-sia)


text:
    Bartalot v. Health First, Inc.
    5D16-3178
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Bre-vard)


text:
    Bascome v. State
    5D16-2153
    07/25/2017
   Aff,

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Baum v. Baum
    5D16-1817, 5D16-1818
    09/18/2017
   Aff.

. Cir. Ct, (Bre-vard)


text:
    Beatty v. State
    5D17-102
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Bell v. U.S. Bank National Association
    5D16-3602
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Bellwether Properties, LLC v. Kingdom Revelation Ministries, Inc.
    5D16-2306
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Lake)


text:
    Benoit v. State
    5D16-2725
    08/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Bhoolai v. State
    5D17-664
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Blocker v. State
    5D16-4243
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Blount v. State
    5D16-2512
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Johns)


text:
    Branton v. State
    5D16-2386
    09/27/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Lake)


text:
    Bright v. Preston
    5D15-3413
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct, (Marion)


text:
    Brown v. State
    5D16-4358
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Brown v. State
    5D16-666
    07/18/2017
   Aff,

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Bush v. State
    5D16-3220
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct, (Bre-vard)


text:
    Butler v. State
    5D16-4457
    08/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Butts v. State
    5D17-895
    07/25/2017
   Aff,

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Bynoe v. State
    5D16-1584
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Putnam)


text:
    C.T. v. State
    5D16-3137
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Carpenter v. State
    5D16-3357
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Bre-vard)


text:
    Carr v. Sapp
    5D17-540
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Sumter)


text:
    Carter v. State
    5D17-992
    09/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Cates v. State
    5D16-3313
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Chacon v. Unifund CCR, LLC
    5D17-229
    07/25/2017
   Aff,

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Chase v. State
    5D17-268
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Church v. State
    5D16-3358
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Cintron v. Deland Housing Authority
    5D16-4120
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Com’n on Human Rel.


text:
    Cipolla v. State
    5D17-200
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Cofield v. State
    5D16-3940
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Coker v. State
    5D16-2475
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Collins v. State
    5D16-4015
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Cook v. State
    5D16-1869
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct, (Putnam)


text:
    Cope v. State
    5D16-1849
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Johns)


text:
    Copeland v. State
    5D17-1547
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Fla-gler)


text:
    Coriolan v. State
    5D17-794
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Cox v. State
    5D16-2436
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Crace v. State
    5D17-306
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Citrus)


text:
    Davis v. Maloch
    5D17-125
    08/28/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St, Johns)


text:
    Deluzio v. Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate
    5D15-4379
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

DBPR


text:
    Deneen v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage
    5D16-2037
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Dixon v. State
    5D16-1784
    10/09/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Downer v. State
    5D17-310
    08/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Ebenezer Stucco Corp. v. Alarcon Construction, Inc.
    5D16-3964
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Edwards v. State
    5D16-1363
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Citrus)


text:
    Elliott v. State
    5D16-3894
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    F.P. v. State
    5D17-325
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Ferrell v. Ellis
    5D16-4127
    08/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Fleury v. State
    5D17-1155
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Ford v. State
    5D17-1288
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Fox v. Fox
    5D16-2946
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Frazier v. State
    5D17-1390
    09/13/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Frazier v. State
    5D16-1763
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Gallagher v. State
    5D17-1358
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Gilbert v. State
    5D16-2766
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Golino v. Golino
    5D16-3173
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Greaves v. State
    5D16-778
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Green v. State
    5D17-1721
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Gregory v. Basich, Inc.
    5D16-1111
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Hagan v. State
    5D16-228, 5D16-231, 5D16-234
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Hagans v. State
    5D16-623
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Putnam)


text:
    Hall v. State
    5D16-986
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Hammer v. State
    5D16-173
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Citrus)


text:
    Harb v. State
    5D16-2296
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct.(Orange)


text:
    Harris v. State
    5D16-2255
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Harrison v. State
    5D16-1414
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Hataway v. State
    5D16-2778
    08/17/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Hatcher v. State
    5D17-712
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Hauter v. State
    5D17-1460
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Citrus)


text:
    Heard v. State
    5D17-1630
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Heffernan v. State
    5D17-1035
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Helmick v. State
    5D16-1015
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Hepburn v. State
    5D17-1040
    08/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Hicks v. State
    5D17-1176
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Hicks v. State
    5D17-563
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Hrabal v. Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC
    5D15-4527
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Hunt v. State
    5D17-1820
    09/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Hunts v. State
    5D17-338
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Hyppolite v. State
    5D16-2537
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Jackson v. State
    5D17-1101
    07/11/2017
   Aff

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Jackson v. State
    5D16-2822
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Jeffus v. State
    5D16-4205
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Johnson v. Department of Corrections
    5D17-6
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Johnson v. State
    5D17-412
    08/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Johnson v. State
    5D15-4314
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Jones v. Jones
    5D16-2496
    07/28/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Jones v. State
    5D16-3410
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Sumter)


text:
    Jones v. State
    5D17-897
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Jones v. State
    5D17-1081
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Lake)


text:
    Jones v. State
    5D16-3699
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Joseph v. State
    5D16-2751
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Keene v. Department of Corrections
    5D17-1169
    08/03/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Citrus)


text:
    Killie v. State
    5D16-1391
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    L.W. v. Department of Children and Families
    5D17-1181
    07/21/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Lampkin v. State
    5D17-1112
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Orange)


text:
    Lapp v. State
    5D17-359
    08/01/2017
   Aff,

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Litzenberger v. State
    5D14-4478
    08/08/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Lowe v. State
    5D16-3376
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Luca v. State
    5D17-789
    08/10/2017
   Aff,

Cir. Ct, (Putnam)


text:
    Luis Rivera v. State
    5D16-1915
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Lyerly v. Gabriel
    5D16-4257
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    M.M. v. State
    5D16-2909, 5D16-2915
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    MacKenzie v. Centex Homes ex rel. Centex Real Estate Corporation
    5D16-3029
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Lake)


text:
    Malik v. State
    5D17-1031
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Marlowe v. State
    5D16-3786
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Martin v. Robbins
    5D16-3105
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Johns)


text:
    Mashburn v. State
    5D17-857
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Johns)


text:
    Mayo v. State
    5D16-2308
    07/05/2017
   Aff,

Cir. Ct, (Marion)


text:
    McAree v. State
    5D16-4448
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct, (Volu-sia)


text:
    Meizlik v. State
    5D16-2144
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Johns)


text:
    Miller v. Miller
    5D16-4135
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir, Ct, (Seminole)


text:
    Miller v. State
    5D17-759
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Miller v. State
    5D16-2476
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Milling v. State
    5D17-1092
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct (St. Johns)


text:
    Mitchell v. State
    5D17-884
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Mobley v. State
    5D16-3614
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Mobley v. State
    5D17-1265
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Fla-gler)


text:
    Moore v. State.
    5D17-1008
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Morales v. State
    5D16-2945
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Murch v. Murch
    5D16-350
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    N.W. v. State
    5D16-3603
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Newman v. U.S. Bank National Association
    5D15-4487
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Nickel v. Estate of Nickel
    5D16-2834
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Her-nando)


text:
    O.T. v. Department of Children and Families
    5D17-1377
    07/07/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Oaks v. State
    5D17-1558
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Odom v. State
    5D17-550
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Putnam)


text:
    Ogletree v. State
    5D16-3753
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Overstreet v. State
    5D17-1049
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Owens v. State
    5D17-101
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Volu-sia)


text:
    Perera v. State
    5D17-1586
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Peterson v. State
    5D16-3163
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Piorkowski v. School Board of Seminole County
    5D16-2032
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole}


text:
    Plantation at Ponte Vedra, Inc. v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
    5D16-2161, 5D16-2675
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Johns)


text:
    Powell v. Powell
    5D16-4273
    08/04/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Powell v. State
    5D16-4061
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Project Orlando, LLC v. PSP/MRC Debt Portfolio S-1, L.P.
    5D16-4251
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Puckett v. State
    5D16-2684
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Volu-sia)


text:
    Q.N.R. v. State
    5D16-3504
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct, (Orange)


text:
    Raghubir v. State
    5D16-3298
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Redden v. State
    5D17-1456
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Rexford v. State
    5D16-1896
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Reynolds v. State
    5D17-1136
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Rivera v. State
    5D16-2798
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Rivera-Munoz v. State
    5D17-289
    08/17/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Cf. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Robinson v. State
    5D17-474
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Rochelien v. State
    5D15-3564
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Rodriguez v. Department of Revenue ex rel. Orsini
    5D16-3264
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Rogers v. State
    5D16-2736
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Roland v. State
    5D16-438
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Fla-gler)


text:
    Roosa v. State
    5D17-1848
    09/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Flagler)


text:
    Rosa-Andino v. State
    5D16-1410
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Sanders v. State
    5D16-4149
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Sapp v. Deloach
    5D16-4146
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Putnam)


text:
    Sarras v. Mills-Sarras
    5D16-2326
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Shavuo v. State
    5D16-1497
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Singer v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
    5D16-918
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volusia)


text:
    Skipper v. State
    5D16-4417
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Johns)


text:
    Smith v. State
    5D17-981
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Smith v. State
    5D17-1166
    08/16/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Smith v. State
    5D16-3141
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Johns)


text:
    Snow v. State
    5D17-952
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Solano v. State
    5D16-3632
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Johns)


text:
    Spaulding v. State
    5D16-3190
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volusia)


text:
    Stewart v. State
    5D17-75
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Stokes v. State
    5D16-1443, 5D16-1445, 5D16-1446, 5D16-1449, 5D15-1450
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Suggs v. State
    5D16-4378
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Sumter)


text:
    Sullivan v. City of Orlando
    5D16-2935
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Sutton v. State
    5D16-2068
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Timmons v. State
    5D17-380
    08/17/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Torres v. State
    5D17-1354
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Turner v. State
    5D17-1363
    09/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    V.M. v. Home At Last Adoption Agency
    5D16-4444
    08/17/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    V.M. v. State
    5D16-3788
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Vazquez v. State
    5D16-2880
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Vergara-Salazar v. State
    5D17-1739
    08/24/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Seminole)


text:
    Village Park Developers, LLC v. Garone
    5D16-2434
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Sumter)


text:
    W.M. v. Department of Children and Families
    5D17-1500
    07/25/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Washington v. State
    5D17-44
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St. Johns)


text:
    Wease v. State
    5D17-230
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Whitfield v. State
    5D17-1392
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Williams v. State
    5D16-4057
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Sumter)


text:
    Williams v. State
    5D16-483
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Williams v. State
    5D17-519
    08/14/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Williams v. State
    5D17-1535
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Orange)


text:
    Williams v. State
    5D17-951
    08/01/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Bre-vard)


text:
    Williams v. Williams
    5D16-3267
    07/18/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Volu-sia)


text:
    Wright v. State
    5D16-799
    07/05/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (Marion)


text:
    Zaccaro v. State
    5D16-4382
    07/11/2017
   Aff.

Cir. Ct. (St, Johns)


author: Taylor, J.

text:
    Rene ST. PIERRE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
    No. 4D16-1669
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [September 27, 2017]
    Jason T. Forman of ’the Law Offices of Jason T, Forman, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
    Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and' Luke R. Napodano, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
   Taylor, J.

Rene St. Pierre appeals his convictions and sentences for burglary and misdemeanor battery. He argues that the trial judge erred in failing to' give the jury a self-defense, instruction for the burglary offense. He also argues that his attorney was ineffective on the face of the record for failing to object to the justifiable use of force instruction given for battery and for failing to object to police opinion evidence. We affirm, without comment, appellant’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims, but we reverse and remand for a new trial on the jury instruction issue.

Appellant and the named victim of the burglary and battery charges were neighbors in a four-unit duplex. One night in September 2012, they got into a scuffle after their dogs fought in their shared backyard area.

At trial, there were different accounts of what happened. The neighbor testified that he was trying to get his dog back inside his apartment when appellant came up behind him and knocked him to the floor. He said appellant then stepped inside his apartment and hit him several more times. He was not able to defend himself because appellant had left by the time he was able to stand up.

Appellant’s girlfriend testified that she was cooking in the kitchen and appellant was grilling in the backyard when the dog fight began. She ran outside to see the neighbor kicking appellant’s dog. Appellant approached the neighbor, who was standing on the stoop of his apartment. The neighbor kicked appellant in the chest, causing the food appellant was carrying to fly out of appellant’s hand. The girlfriend turned to put the dog inside, looked back up, and saw appellant and the neighbor fighting inside the neighbor’s apartment.

Appellant did not testify, but the jury watched his taped interview with the police. During the interview, appellant told police that after the neighbor hit him, he hit the neighbor to defend himself. Before the encounter, appellant had seen the neighbor kick his dog and push his girlfriend. He was at the neighbor’s doorway when the neighbor kicked him, which prompted him to defend himself. Appellant said that at some point, while defending himself, he may have ended up inside the neighbor’s apartment. Appellant had the following two exchanges with the police detective on this issue:

Detective: Yeah, like what I’m saying is, like, what were you doing inside the guy’s house?
Appellant: What was I doing? I didn’t go inside the guy’s house.
Detective: So how did you end up inside the house then?
Appellant: I don’t know. This all happened right—this all happened right out—I was cooking a steak. I wasn’t involved with this whole thing. I don’t even f****** know. I am so confused right now. All I did was tell the truth and now I’m sitting here.
Detective: What I’m saying is how did you end up inside the guy’s house?
Appellant: I don’t know. I can’t tell you. It all happened right there.
Detective: Right there where?
Appellant: Right in the doorway of his house. It’s not like I ran into his house or anything. I don’t know what—I don’t know what, do you know what I mean, entering his house? It’s not like I chased him into his house. It all happened. That’s why I don’t understand what you guys are talking about because it all happened right there in the doorway.
Detective: Right in the doorway?
Appellant: Yes.
Detective: What I’m saying is it may have started out there in the doorway—
Appellant: Well, it started outside.
Detective: Right.
Appellant: And then it led back in there. And then when I came over, that’s when I got kicked. I mean, I don’t know. I wasn’t expecting to get kicked, you know, and I was just bold kicked and then I remember like a little girl like this (demonstrating). And then I defended myself. That’s all—that’s all that I can—that’s all that I know.

After the incident, appellant was charged by information with burglary of a dwelling (Count I) and misdemeanor battery (Count II). During the charge conference, his attorney requested that the trial court instruct the jury on self-defense as to both the burglary and battery counts. Appellant’s attorney argued that the burglary offense was tied to the battery, offense, such that if the jury found appellant not guilty of battery, then his entrance into the neighbor’s house would not be unlawful because he was defending himself and happened to cross the neighbor’s threshold during the course of his defense. Appellant’s attorney proposed the following special instruction: •

In the event that you find the Defendant did not commit the offense of battery because he was entitled to the justifiable use of non-deadly force, then any entry or remaining upon the property of [the neighbor] by the Defendant in the course of defending himself would not be considered unlawful.

The trial court declined to give the requested instruction, noting that it was not a correct statement of the law to instruct the jury that if it acquitted appellant on the battery charge, then it was required also to acquit on the burglary charge. Further, the court found that self-defense was not an available defense for the burglary offense because appellant did not have a right to pursue the mutual combat into the neighbor’s apartment.

Defense counsel disagreed with the trial court’s ruling that self-defense was not a defense to burglary, but offered to modify the language of the requested special instruction. The trial court essentially replied that it had “already ruled.”

Ultimately, the trial court gave the standard self-defense instruction as to the battery offense, stating that “[i]f the Defendant was not engaged in an unlawful activity ... he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force, including deadly force, if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm .... ” However, the court refused to give a self-defense instruction on the burglary offense. The jury rejected appellant’s self-defense claim on the battery charge and found appellant guilty on both counts as charged in the information. The court adjudicated appellant and sentenced him to 21.15 months in prison on the burglary charge and to time served on the battery charge.

On appeal, appellant argues that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on self-defense for the burglary charge, as well as the battery charge. Appellant contends that the charges were based on the same acts and, thus, were dependent on each other. We agree.

, A trial court’s decision to give a requested jury instruction is generally reviewed for an abuse of. discretion. Charles v. State, 945 So.2d 579, 582 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). The trial court’s discretion in criminal cases “is rather narrow because a criminal defendant is entitled to have the jury instructed on his or her theory of defense, if there is any evidence to support this theory,” Davis v. State, 922 So.2d 438, 444 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006), “no matter how weak or flimsy.” See Gregory v. State, 937 So.2d 180, 182 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). “The trial court should not. weigh the evidence for the purpose of determining whether the instruction is appropriate.” Id. (quoting Garramone v. State, 636 So.2d 869, 870 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)); see also Calkins v. State, 170 So.3d 888, 890 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (finding error in the court’s decision that the evidence' did not support a self-defense instruction). For a defendant to be entitled to a special jury instruction, one element the defendant must prove is that “the special instruction was a correct statement of the law and not misleading or confusing.” Stephens v. State, 787 So.2d 747, 756 (Fla. 2001).

. Here, we find that the trial court committed reversible error by ruling that self-defense was not an available defense for the burglary charge under the .circumstances of this case. We need not decide whether the trial court properly refused to give the■ requested special'instruction as written. Defense counsel requested a self-defense instruction on the burglary charge, defense counsel was not tied to the wording of the proposed special instruction, and the trial court made it clear that the court would deny any self-defense instruction as to the burglary charge because the court believed self-defense could not apply'to a burglary offense. At a minimum, the trial court should have given the standard self-defense instruction for both the battery and- the burglary charges, rather than just for the battery charge, where appellant’s theory of defense was that his possible entry into his neighbor’s apartment was not to start a fight but was necessitated by his need to defend himself from an attack that had begun outside and continued unabated inside. See Pitts v. State, 989 So.2d 27, 30 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (failure to provide a self-defense instruction was error where' defendant was charged with burglary with assault or battery and argued that his entry into the truck and battery were necessitated by self-defense because, while defending himself, he lost his balance and reached into the truck to grab the driver’s shirt); see also Gregory, 937 So.2d at 182 (failure to provide self-defense instruction was error where defendant was charged with burglary with battery and there was testimony that the victim first pushed the defendant, who pushed back and ended up inside the victim’s apartment after a shoving match). Whether appellant’s version of the events was credible or not was a question for the jury to decide.

In Garramone, we explained:

It is not the quantum or the quality of the proof’as to self-defense that determines the requirement for giving the charge. If any evidence of a substantial character is adduced ... the element of self-defense becomes an issue, and the jury, as the trier of the facts, should be duly charged as to the law thereon, because it is the jury’s function to determine that issue.

636 So.2d at 870 (citing Kiernan v. State, 613 So.2d 1362, 1364 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (quoting Kilgore v. State, 271 So.2d 148, 152 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972)).

Although the state did not charge appellant with burglary with a battery, the facts of this case—or, at the least, appellant’s theory of the case—suggest that the two charged offenses are so inextricably intertwined that they result in the functional equivalent of a- single charge, such that Pitts■ and Gregory would be directly on point. The trial court does not weigh the evidence in determining whether the instruction is appropriate. See Gregory, 937 So.2d at 182; Calkins, 170 So.3d at 890.

Much like the defendants in Pitts and Gregory, appellant presented evidence indicating that the burglary and the battery were part of the same action. See Pitts, 989 So.2d at 31 n.3 (distinguishing Pitts’ case from cases in which the burglary and battery are not a part of the same transaction). In short, appellant argued that he committed the battery in self-defense and was then required, in self-defense, to continue the battery inside the neighbor’s apartment. See Gregory, 937 So.2d at 182-83 (finding that evidence that the defendant was first struck and that he responded only with the use of non-deadly force entitled the defendant to have the jury instructed on his theory of self-defense, and the failure to give the requested instruction on the justifiable use of non-deadly force was reversible error).

Appellant next argues the state cannot demonstrate that the error in failing to give the self-defense instruction on the burglary charge was harmless, because the standard jury instruction given on the battery charge erroneously included a duty to retreat and a fatal grammatical error that may have caused the jury to reject the self-defense claim as to the battery charge. The state responds that any error in failing to instruct the jury that justifiable use of force applies to the burglary charge is harmless, because the jury received the standard instruction for justifiable use of force as to the battery charge. See Vila v. State, 74 So.3d 1110, 1113 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (guilty verdict for'burglary rendered failure to give self-defense instruction for battery harmless). In addition, the state argues that the self-defense instruction given for battery was not so fundamentally erroneous as to preclude harmless error on the burglary charge.

During the charge conference, the trial court initially said it would remove the “no duty to retreat” language from the justifiable use of force instruction for the battery offense. Appellant’s counsel asked the court to include this language because appellant could -argue that he was in his own dwelling or residence when he first was kicked; Ultimately, appellant’s counsel agreed to an instruction based, on the 2012 version of section 776.013, Florida Statutes, which, in pertinent part, included:

The defendant was not engaged in an unlawful activity. He was attacked in a place where he had a right to be. He had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and meet force with force if he believed that it was necessary to do-so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself or to prevent the commission of a forcible felony.

Appellant’s counsel asked the trial court to read the stand your ground version of no duty to retreat, changing the phrase “including deadly force” to non-deadly force, but then agreed that, the instruction was fine as it was because .it would include non-deadly force. The court read to the jury . the following instruction based on section 776.013 regarding the self-defense claim on the battery charge:

If the Defendant was not engaged in an unlawful activity, and was attacked any place where he had a right to be, he had no duty to retreat and had the right to stand his ground and .meet force with force, including deadly force, if he reasonably believed that it was necessary to do so to prevent death or great bodily harm to himself,or. to prevent the commission of a forcible felony. A person does not have a duty to retreat if a person is in place where he has a right to be.

• Florida courts have previously noted that the inclusion of the extraneous comma after the phrase “including deadly force” is erroneous because it suggests that a defendant does, not have a right to defend himself by meeting force with force unless the victim had threatened him with deadly force. See Neal v. State, 169 So.3d 158, 164 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015); see also Talley v. State, 106 So.3d 1015, 1017-18 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013). Furthermore, there is no duty to retreat when using non-deadly force. See Hansen v. State, 898 So.2d 201, 204 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (citing Morris v. State, 715 So.2d 1177, 1179 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)). Appellant correctly points out that the 2012 version of section 776.012 did not require him to prove that he was not engaged in unlawful activity, but this was not the section under which appellant’s counsel requested the justifiable use of force defense. See Dorsey v. State, 149 So.3d 144, 146 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014).

Although the erroneous battery instructions do not amount to fundamental error in this case, the state has not met its burden to show that the failure to properly instruct the jury on self-defense for the burglary charge was harmless error. “[I]t is appropriate to consider both the preserved and unpreserved errors in determining whether the preserved error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” Martinez v. State, 761 So.2d 1074, 1082-83 (Fla. 2000). Here, the jury may have rejected the self-defense claim for the battery offense because of the extra comma error and additional burden imposed on appellant. This, of course, could have affected the verdict. See State v. DiGuilio, 491 So.2d 1129, 1138 (Fla. 1986) (noting that under the harmless error test, the burden is on the state to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the complained of error did not contribute to the verdict, i.e., “that there is no reasonable possibility that the error contributed to the conviction”).

Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions for the trial court, on retrial, to instruct the jury as to self-defense on the battery and burglary charges, consistent with appellant’s theory of -defense.

Reversed and Remanded.

May and Conner, JJ., concur.

      . Appellant claims trial counsel was ineffective on the face of the record for failing to object to the justifiable use' of force instruction given. We decline to address this claim on direct appeal as trial counsel may have had strategic reasons, which would be more properly addressed during post-conviction proceedings.


author: Warner, J.

text:
    MANAGED CARE INSURANCE CONSULTANTS, INC., Appellant, v. UNITED HEALTHCARE INSURANCE COMPANY; United Healthcare of Florida, Inc.; and any and all entities that are its affiliates, Appellees.
    No. 4D16-2767
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [October 4, 2017]

      Glenn J. Waldman, Douglas. T. Marx of Waldman Trigoboff Hildebrandt & Calnan, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
    Todd R. Legón and William F. Rhodes of Legón Fodiman, P.A., Miami, and David B. Potter and Archana Nath of Fox Rothschild LLP, Minneapolis, MN, for appellees.
   Warner, J.

We grant the motion for clarification, withdraw our prior opinion,- and substitute the following in its place.

Managed Care Insurance Consultants, Inc., appeals the order denying its motion to vacate an arbitration award based on the partiality of one of the arbitrators. It contends that it showed that the arbitrator had an actual conflict, as her husband’s medical practice had a business connection with the appellee, United Healthcare of Florida. Because the court found that the arbitrator did not have “actual knowledge of such a relationship or potential conflict prior to' or during the subject arbitration,” nor was there any actual bias shown, the court did not err in denying the motion. We affirm.

United Health Care (“United”) contracted with Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) to offer Medicare Advantage health plans to Medicare beneficiaries in South Florida. In exchange for United providing Medicare benefits, CMS made monthly payments to United for each of its Medicare Advantage members. United entered into a delegation agreement with Managed Care Insurance Consultants, Inc. (“MCIC”)', whereby United delegated to MCIC some of its medical management responsibilities under the contract with CMS, In return, United was to pay, the authorized claims and to fund the payments with funds it received from CMS. MCIC was to be compensated from revenue placed into a risk pool, based upon a ratio of expenses to revenue. Both parties -claimed that the other breached the agreement.

The contract had an arbitration provision through the American Arbitration Association (“AAA”). The AAA appointed three arbiters to hear the dispute, including the chairperson.

We need not detail the claims and the arbitral proceedings. In short, MCIC contended that United had not funded the risk pool properly, nor had it paid only authorized expenses from the pool. MCIC claimed lost revenues between $14 million and $21 million. United, on the other hand, claimed that there were deficits in the risk pool due to' MCIC’s management of patient care. It sought damages in the millions of dollars.

In the Final Arbitration Award, the panel found, that United had breached the agreement for funding the risk pool, but did not award any damages to MCIC because it found.the evidence in support of the claimed damages was too- speculative. Similarly, the panel found for MCIC on its claim that certain patient expenses should have been removed, from the risk pool reconciliation. Again, however, it did not award damages because of “its inability to quantify ' vrath reasonable certainty the amount of invalid claims that were paid by United.” As to United’s claim against MCIC, the panel denied relief because United could not establish that it had performed its part of the contract. Thus, neither party obtained a damage award from the other party. MCIC made a motion to affirm the portion of the arbitration award which found that United had breached the agreement and to vacate the portion which refused to award MCIC damages. The panel denied the motion and the order became final.

Subsequently, MCIC filed a petition in circuit court to confirm the award as to its findings of liability in its favor but to vacate the denial of damages. It claimed that the lack of damage award was contrary to Florida law, and the evidence was clear that it was entitled to at least $24 million in damages,

■ After filing its petition, MCIC filed an amended petition to vacate the-award in its entirety because of the chairperson’s failure to disclose the relationship between her physician' husband and United. The chairperson’s husband was a cardiologist associated with HeartWell, a large cardiology group in South Florida. He treated patients at HeartWell who were insured by United. He was also on the Board of Directors of HeartWell. The motion alleged that the chairperson was the primary architect of the arbitration award based on .the amounts she charged to the parties after the close of the final hearing. The motion also alleged that she never disclosed that her husband had a contractual relationship with United or that some of the medical claims at issue were actually-paid to her spouse. Because HeartWell was part of United’s network—and United reimbursed HeartWell for its .'doctors’ treatment of patients insured by United— the chairperson’s failure to disclose that she was married to a physician receiving payments from United established partiality on her part.

The court allowed limited discovery from the chairperson. In the chairperson’s deposition via written questions, she testified that she had asked her husband if he had any relationship with United and he told her he didn’t. She had him look at the witness lists, as well as the parties, and he said he had no dealings with any of them. She stated that if she had known he had a relationship' she would have disclosed it, but “[m]ost of the times he probably doesn’t even know who the insurance companies are for his patients, and he did not tell me that he had any relationship with United Healthcare,” She was not aware of any money that her husband, or his practice, received from- United; nor was she aware that'HeartWell had a contract with United. She was asked whether, between 2010 and 2015, HeartWell billed United $41.3 million, and United paid HeartWell $12.9 million for medical services, something she should háve disclosed. She testified that she had no idea that there was a relationship. After reviewing the AAA oath, which required her to do a reasonable investigation of. potential conflicts, she testified that she had made that investigation by questioning her husband and presenting him with the conflicts checklist of the parties and witnesses.

In lieu of testimony at the, hearing .on the motion to vacate, MCIC submitted the affidavit of another arbitrator. That arbitrator testified that the relationship between the physician husband and United should have been disclosed and that the chairperson arbitrator was obligated to . do an investigation to ascertain the business relationship. The affidavit did not opine on what a reasonable investigation would; include.

The trial court denied both motions to vacate the award. As to the issue of conflict on the part , of the chairperson, the court relied on Gianelli Money Purchase Plan & Trust v. ADM Investor Services, Inc., 146 F.3d 1309, 1313 (11th Cir. 1998), to conclude that MCIC had not proved an actual conflict nor that actual bias had beeh shown, The court ruled that “although there was evidence that [the arbitrator’s husband] treats patients who are insured by United.and, as a result, receives reimbursement from United, there was insufficient evidence demonstrating [that the arbitrator] had actual knowledge of such a relationship or potential conflict prior to or during the subject arbitration.” As to the original claim that the arbitration panel had exceeded its powers by not applying the correct law, the court found that this was not a statutory ground for vacating the award and denied the petition. From this order, MCIC appeals.

In order to vacate an arbitration award, one of the statutory grounds listed in section 682.13(1), Florida Statutes (2015), must be present. One of the statutory grounds warranting vacatur is that there was“[e]vident partiality by an arbitrator. appointed as a neutral arbitrator” § 682.13(1)(b)1., Fla. Stat. An arbitrator has an. affirmative duty to disclose to the parties any business relationships that the arbitrator .might have., which might create the impression of possible bias, See Weinger v. State Farm Fire Cas. Co., 620 So.2d 1298, 1299 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993).

The Federal Arbitration Act, which applies in this case, likewise permits.vacatur of an arbitration award where a litigant shows “evident partiality or corruption in the arbitrators[.]” 9 U.S.C. § 10(a)(2) (2015). In Gianelli, the Eleventh Circuit followed its prior precedent and' held that “an arbitration award may be vacated due to the ‘evident partiality’ of an arbitrator only when either (1) an actual conflict exists, or (2) the arbitrator knows of, but fails to disclose, information which would lead a reasonable person to believe that a potential conflict exists.” Gianelli, 146 F.3d at 1312.

In Gianelli, the office manager of the Gray Harris law firm was chosen as an arbitrator for a dispute between Gianelli and an investor service. Id. at 1310. Before the arbitration commenced, Gianelli discovered that Gray Harris represented the principal of the adverse party, Kelly, in a lawsuit. Id. The office manager professed no knowledge of the case, and the principal indicated that it was an isolated incident. Id. After the office manager arbitrator rendered a ruling in favor of ADM, Gianel-li discovered that the relationship between Kelly and Gray Harris was considerably more extensive. Id. Prior to the office manager’s employment with the Gray Harris firm, the firm had extensive representation of Kelly, but the arbitrator did not know of the representation. Id. While the district court granted the motion to vacate for evident partiality, the circuit court reversed. Id; It concluded that there was no showing of actual bias, and thus the first criteria of actual conflict did not exist. Id. at 1313. As to the second criteria, it found that nothing in the record showed that the arbitrator knew of the prior representation of Kelly. Id. “Because [the arbitrator] did not have actual knowledge of the information upon which the alleged ‘conflict’ was founded, the second ‘evident partiality condition is not present in.this case.” Id.

Gianelli has been criticized in several courts for requiring actual knowledge of a conflict without requiring that the arbitrator conduct an investigation to ascertain whether a conflict exists. See, e.g., New Regency Prod., Inc. v. Nippon Herald Films, Inc., 501 F.3d 1101, 1109 (9th Cir. 2007). Those courts impose a duty to investigate potential conflicts. Id.; see also Schmitz v. Zilveti, 20 F.3d 1043 (9th Cir. 1994); Applied Indus. Materials Corp. v. Ovalar Makine Ticaret Ve Sanayi, A.S., 492 F.3d 132 (2d Cir. 2007); ANR Coal Co. v. Cogentrix of N.C., Inc., 173 F.3d 493 (4th Cir. 1999).

The cases requiring investigation deal with instances in which lawyers have not made a conflicts check within their own firm- or a business person has not make a check of business relationships of the arbitrator’s own business with the arbitration parties. In this case, however, the business relationship is between the arbitrator’s husband’s business and one of the parties to the arbitration. The arbitrator did do an investigation by asking her husband about any conflicts and presenting him with a conflicts checklist. Thus, even if a duty to investigate is required,' the arbitrator complied. We do not believe that the arbitrator is compelled to disbelieve the information she is given by her husband and investigate further. We are not even sure that the arbitrator would have the ability , to probe the .corporate business to determine whether a conflict exists.

Under Florida law, section 682.041, Florida Statutes (2015), requires that an arbitrator disclose any “known facts that a reasonable person would consider likely to affect the person’s impartiality as an arbitrator in the arbitration proceeding[.]” § 682.041(1), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added). If there was no evidence that the arbitrator knew of the facts, then there would be no basis for vacatur. Thus, the Florida Arbitration Code adheres most closely to Gianelli.

There was no actual bias shown by the arbitrator in this case, nor was there an actual conflict. The arbitrator did not know of the business relationship between her husband’s corporate employer and United (nor, apparently, did her husband). The trial court did not err in denying the motion to vacate.

In its other claim for vacatur of the arbitration award, MCIC claims that the arbitrators exceeded their powers under the agreement by failing to apply controlling Florida law in denying any damage award. As found by the trial court, this is an attempt to disguise what is clearly a claim of legal error by the arbitration panel, which is not a ground to vacate an arbitration award. See Hall St. Assoc., LLC v. Mattel, Inc., 552 U.S. 576, 585-86, 128 S.Ct. 1396, 170 L.Ed.2d 254 (2008) (holding that arbitrator’s legal error is not renewable under the Federal Arbitration Act and contract cannot expand grounds for vacating award).

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the order denying the motion to vacate the arbitration award.

Damoorgian and Forst, JJ., concur.


author: Per Curiam.

text:
    Scott FERENCE, Appellant, v. Lissette FERENCE, Appellee.
    No. 4D15-2790
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    [October 18, 2017]
    Richard L. Rosenbaum of Law Offices of Richard Rosenbaum, Fort-vLauderdale, for appellant.
    Alan Jay Braverman of Law Offices of Alan Jay Braverman, P.A., Fort Lauder-dale, for appellee.
   Per Curiam.

Affirmed. See Boot v. Sapp, 714 So.2d 579 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).

Damoorgian, Conner and Forst, JJ., concur.


author: SLEET, Judge.

text:
    Robert LIBRIZZI, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. Karen LIBRIZZI, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
    Case No. 2D15-2919
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Opinion filed June 9, 2017
    Rehearing Denied August 24, 2017

      Chrystal R. Koch of Koch Law Firm, Sarasota, for Appellant/Cross-Appellee.
    Edward B. Sobel of Edward B. Sobel, P.A., Bradenton, for Appellee/Cross-Ap-pellant,
   SLEET, Judge.

The former husband, Robert Librizzi, appeals and the former wife, Karen Libriz-zi, cross-appeals the final order dissolving their twenty-five-year marriage. The former husband challenges the equitable distribution scheme, the alimony.award, and the award of attorney fees to the former wife. The former wife contests the alimony award, arguing that the trial court should have considered the tax implications of the award on the parties .in making its determination pursuant to section 61.08(2)(h), Florida Statutes- (2012).- Because the former husband’s arguments regarding-equitable distribution ate either unpreserved, without merit, or both, we affirm the equitable distribution scheme without further comment. We also affirm the trial' court’s determination of .the former wife’s need for support and:the portion of:the order requiring the former husband -to maintain a life insurance policy to secure his support obligation. However, we reverse the portion'of the order awarding $6918.75 in alimony to the former wife because the trial court erred when it failed to consider the former wife’s evidence as to the tax consequences of the support determination.

The magistrate initially recommended $9500 in monthly alimony for the former vvife. in its recommended dissolution order. After the circuit court- partially granted the former husband’s exceptions to the recommended order, a second magistrate held a.limited hearing to reconsider specific elements of the equitable, distribution scheme and the support award, including to make a determination of the former husband’s net income. During the hearing, the former wife submitted calculations of the former husband’s net income that included a tax credit, consistent. with the $9500 alimony award. Although the calculations were based on evidence admitted at trial, the magistrate declined to consider them. The magistrate also declined to hear any testimony from the former wife’s CPA, who was present at the hearing. Instead, the magistrate based his calculation of the former husband’s net income on the former husband’s 2014 financial affidavit, which reflected an annual tax liability of over $60,000. Significantly, the former husband’s CPA had previously testified that the 2014 affidavit did not include tax deductions related to the payment of any alimony to the former wife.' The former wife’s CPA testified, consistently with this assessment before the first magistrate, saying that there was no support for the $60,000 annual tax liability and that the alimony payments would reduce the former husband’s tax obligation. After the hearing, the second magistrate recommended reducing the alimony award to $6900. The circuit court denied the former wife’s exceptions to this order and adopted the magistrate’s recommended order in full.

This court reviews an alimony award for an abuse of discretion. Crick v. Crick, 78 So.3d 696, 698 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012). Section 61.08(2)(h) requires that the trial court consider “[t]he tax treatment and consequences to both parties of an alimony award.” This court has consistently held that “[i]t is error for the trial court to fail to consider tax implications of an alimony award when such evidence is presented.” Tarkow v. Tarkow, 128 So.3d 82, 85 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (quoting Farley v. Farley, 800 So.2d 710, 712 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)). Accordingly, it was error for the magistrate to award alimony without considering the former wife’s evidence regarding the tax consequences of the award on the former husband’s net income and error for the circuit court to deny the former wife’s exceptions and approve the recommended award. We reverse the amount of the alimony award and remand for recalculation. On remand, the trial court shall consider evidence of the tax consequences of the support award on the former husband’s net income.

The former husband also challenges the trial court’s award of fees to the former wife. However,, because the order on appeal only determines entitlement, not the amount of the fee award, this court lacks jurisdiction to review the issue. See Smith v. Smith, 169 So.3d 220, 221 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015). Accordingly, the former husband’s appeal of the fee award is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part with instructions; dismissed in part. •

VILLANTI, C.J., and SALARIO, J., Concur.


author: CRENSHAW, Judge.

text:
    The HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK, Successor By Merger To The Huntington Mortgage Company, Appellant, v. Warren WATTERS a/k/a Warren A. Watters; unknown Spouse of Warren Watters; Teresa A. Watters; Suntrust Bank; FIA Card Services, N.A.; Cape Haze Property Owners Association, Inc,; Unknown Tenant #1; Unknown Tenant #2, Appellees.
    Case Nos. 2D16-3347
    2D16-4042
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
    Opinion filed June 30, 2017
    Victor H. Veschio and Georgi Angelov of Gibbons Neuman, ■ Tampa,' for Appellant.
    Gregg Horowitz, Sarasota, for Appellee Warren Watters.
    No appearance for remaining Appellees.
   CRENSHAW, Judge.

Because the trial court erred in finding that Huntington National Bank’s (Huntington) attempt to foreclose on Warren Watters’s property was barred by the statute of limitations, we reverse.

On February 24, 2015, Huntington initiated a second action to foreclose on Watters’s property, alleging the same default dates indicated in the first action, “August 1, 2007, and all subsequent payments.” In his answer, Watters asserted numerous affirmative defenses, including that the statute of limitations had run in 2012. The trial court granted final summary judgment for Watters, basing its decision solely upon a finding that the action was barred by the statute of limitations. We disagree. This court has held that alleging “a continuing state of default at the time of the filing of the complaint [is] sufficient to satisfy the ... statute of limitations.” Desylvester v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 219 So.3d 1016, 2017 WL 2562370 (Fla. 2d DCA June 23, 2017); see also Bollettieri Resort Villas Condo. Ass’n v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 198 So.3d 1140, 1142 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (“[T]he bank’s complaint was sufficient to establish that foreclosure could be based on any of the missed payments since the initial breach and was therefore not barred by the statute of limitations.”), review granted, No. SC16-1680 (Fla. Nov. 2, 2016). As Huntington’s complaint had asserted a “continuing state of default” since August 1, 2007, Huntington had the right to foreclose for each default which was within the statutory period, and the action was therefore not barred.

Accordingly, we reverse the final summary judgment and the final judgment of attorney fees and costs for Watters.

Reversed.

NORTHCUTT and CASANUEVA, JJ., Concur.

      . That action was involuntarily dismissed without prejudice on October 9, 2013.