City Of Largo, Florida v. AHF-BayFund, LLC, Case No. SC15-1261 (Fla. 2017).
PILOT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes agreements that pay government in lieu of ad valorem taxes) contracts do not violate either Florida Statute section 196.1978 or Florida Constitution Article VII, § 9(a).
The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company, N.A. v. Fitzgerald, Case No. 3D16-981(Fla. 3d DCA 2017).
A party who successfully defends a mortgage foreclosure suit on the basis of lack of standing is not entitled to an award of attorney’s fees because there is no privity between plaintiff and defendant sufficient to implicate Florida Statute section 57.105 (7).
Rippo v. Baker, Case No. 16–6316 (2017).
The Due Process Clause may require recusal of a judge even when the judge has no actual bias; recusal is required when, viewed objectively, “the probabilityof actual bias on the part of the judge or decisionmakeris too high to be constitutionally tolerable.”
Tarantola v. Henghold, M.D., P.A., Case No. 1D16-3718 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017).
When used in a restrictive covenant, the phrase “including [a specific restriction]” following a general restriction illustrates the restricted conduct and are not words that limit the restriction.
Harris v. U.S. Bank National Association, Case No. 1D15-2022 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017).
The “face to face” counseling requirements of H.U.D. regulation 24 C.F.R. § 203.604 are a condition precedent when the lender has a branch within 200 miles of the borrower, but the condition precedent can be waived.
Spradleyv. Spradley, Case No. 2D15-4850 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017).
A cause of action for conversion can be brought for wrongful detention of items which have no intrinsic value, including papers and documents.
ARC HUD I, LLC v. Ebbert, Case No. 2D15-4848 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017).
The time to determine whether a lender has a branch within 200 miles of borrower so as to bring into play the “face to face” counseling requirements of H.U.D. regulation 24 C.F.R. § 203.604 is when the borrower defaults.
Flinnv. Doty, Case No. 4D15-2424 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).
Unjust enrichment is all that is necessary to impose an equitable lien on a homestead; fraud and egregious conduct are not requirements to imposition of the equitable lien.
Stanbro v. Mccormick 105, LLC, Case No. 4D16-3071 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).
A judgment creditor seeking to garnish a bank account held in the name of multiple parties must prove the funds are exclusively the property of the judgment debtor.
ICMFG & Associates, Inc. v. The Bare Board Group, Inc., Case No. 2D15-3557 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017).
A plaintiff is required to prove a connection between the tortious conduct of the defendant and its lost profits, even when defendant’s pleadings have been struck as a sanction for misconduct.
Villages of Avignon Community Development District v. Burton, Case No. 2D16-1048 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017).
Ad valorem tax liens are subject to the same priority as CDD liens.
Allied Universal Corporation v. Given,Case No. 3D16-1128 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017).
Irreparable injury is presumed once a movant establishes a substantial business interest that is protectible under Florida Statute § 542.335; the burden then shifts to the non-movant to establish the absence of injury.
Village of Palmetto Bay, Florida v. Alexander School, Inc., Case No. 3D16-1201 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017).
Zoning ordinances which require approval of voters before a municipality will act on a requested zoning change are not unconstitutional deprivations of due process. Moreover, such ordinances are legislative enactments for which movant must prove the ordinance is “unreasonable and bears nosubstantial relation to public health, safety, morals or general welfare.”
City of Riviera Beach v. J & B Motel Corp., Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Case No. 4D16-0174 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).
Municipalities have twenty years to foreclose Chapter 162 code enforcement liens.
U.S. Bank National Association v. Roseman, Case No. 4D16-876 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).
A promissory note sought to be introduced at trial that varies from the one attached to the complaint is reviewed for violation of Florida Statute § 673.4071 as to whether such alteration modifies the obligation of any party or whether the alteration was fraudulently placed on the instrument.
Czyzewskiv. Jevic Holding Corp., Case No. 15–649 (2017).
“Structured dismissal” plans under 11 U.S.C. 1112(b) must pay creditors in accordance with the bankruptcy priority rules.
Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. Varsity Brands, Inc., Case No. 15–866 (2017).
Copyright law protects “features” incorporated into the design only if the feature can independently be perceived asa two- or three-dimensional work of art separate from the useful article,and qualifies, by itself as a protectable pictorial, graphic, or sculptural work.
Purchasing Power, LLC v. Bluestem Brands, Inc., Case No. 16-11896 (11th Cir. 2017).
The state of citizenship of a LLC, for diversity purposes, is the state of citizenship of its members traced back to an individual.
Costco Wholesale Corporation v. Llanio-Gonzalez, Case No. 4D15-4869 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).
Attaching a general release to a Proposal for Settlement does not make the proposal ambiguous and unenforceable.
Expressions Hair Design v.Schneiderman, Case No. 15–1391 (2017).
A law which prohibits a merchant from imposing a surcharge for the use of a credit card regulates speech because it instructs how merchants communicate their prices.
Khleif v. Bankers Trust Company of California, N.A., Case No. 2D15-4853 (Fla 2d DCA 2017).
A plaintiff proves a prima facie case by attaching to its complaint and introducing into evidence a short form mortgage that refers to the full, recorded long form mortgage.
Piero Salussolia, P.A. v. Nunnari, Case No. 3D16-436 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017).
The following “success fee” provision in an attorney engagement agreement is an unenforceable agreement to agree in the future:
- Success Fee. A success fee of a percentage, to be agreed uponamongst the parties hereto, based on the amount by which Client’sJudgment amount is reduced will be charged as a success fee NOT TOEXCEED 1 MILLION. For example, if Client owes $10,000.00 on theJudgment and through the Appeal and/or the Settlement, that amountis reduced to $6,000.00 saving Client $4,000.00, then the Firmsuccess fee shall be a percentage of $4,000.00. Success fee shall bepayable to the Firm immediately upon termination of the Appealand/or the full execution of the Settlement Agreement.
Phelan v. Lawhon, Case Nos. 3D16-1858; 3D16-1838; 3D16-1675 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017).
The Corporate Shield Doctrine does not stop a Florida court from acquiring long-arm jurisdiction over out of state defendants.
Foster v. Bank of America, N.A., Case No. 3D16-2655 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017).
While a financial institution is required by Florida Statute section655.059(1)(e) to keep all of its financial records confidential, a court of competent jurisdiction may compel the institution to release the records.
Element Financial Corp. VvMarcinkoskiGradall, Inc., Case No. 4D16-368 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).
A guarantor is not a “debtor” within the meaning of the Uniform Commercial Code, Florida Statute section 679.3161(1)(b), and therefore a creditor is not required to file notice of its lien in order to perfect its securityinterest within four months of a guarantor moving to Florida.
Sawgrass Ford, Inc. v. Vargas, Case No. 4D16-3457 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).
A trial court may compel arbitration on the basis of fairness, including equitable estoppel.
Jane E. Bistline, M.D., P.A. V. Anthony Rogers, M.D., Case No. 4D16-4012 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017).
Intentional interference with a business relationship may rise to the level of supporting punitive damages, but the conduct must be “egregious and sufficiently reprehensible to rise to the level oftruly culpable behavior deserving of punishment.”
Archer v. U.S. Bank National Association, Case No. 5D16-1970 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017).
An order denying a motion to quash constructive service in an in rem case is not an appealable final order because there is no determination of the jurisdiction of a person.