Mississippi v. Tennessee, Case No. 143, Orig. (2021).
No State has a sovereign right to the water in an aquifer, and the Court’s Equitable Apportionment jurisprudence (each of the States has an equality right to use the water at issue) applies to interstate, underground aquifers.
Jackson v. Le Centre on Fourth, LLC (In re: Le Centre on Fourth, LLC), Case No. 20-12785 (11th Cir. 2021).
Notwithstanding that a hearing notice did not comply with Bankruptcy Rule of Procedure 2002(c)(3) (conspicuous language on a notice is required when a plan of reorganization proposes an injunction against non-debtors), a creditor is barred from later objecting to a reorganization plan which contains discharge injunctions in favor of third parties if the creditor received actual notice of the confirmation hearing and did not object at the hearing.
State Farm Florida Insurance Company v. Carapella (In Re: Gaime), Case No. 20-12240 (11th Cir. 2021).
The Bankruptcy Code’s automatic stay provision precludes a post-judgment motion to intervene in a state court action.
Callahan v. United Network for Organ Sharing, Case No. 20-13932 (11th Cir. 2021).
Discovery materials are not conclusively deemed “judicial records” but may become so – and likewise become subject to public disclosure as a judicial record – if attached to a substantive motion.
1944 Beach Boulevard, LLC v. Live Oak Banking Company (In Re: NRP Lease Holdings, LLC), Case No. 21-11742 (11th Cir. 2021).
The Eleventh Circuit certifies questions regarding Florida Statute section 679.5016(3) (safe harbor for incorrect spelling of debtor names in UCC-1 Financing Statements) to the Florida Supreme Court.
In Re: Redefinition of Appellate Districts and Certification of Need for Additional Appellate Judges, Case No. SC21-1543 (Fla. 2021).
The Florida Supreme Court certifies the need for a sixth appellate district and recommends it be based in the Northeast Florida area.
In Re: Amendments to Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 1-3.10 and Florida Rule of General Practice and Judicial Administration 2.510, Case No. SC21-722 (Fla. 2021).
The process for pro hac vice is amended and out of state attorneys are required to comply with the Florida Rules of General Practice.
Andreatta v. Brown, Case No. 1D20-2397 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021).
Email communication between counsel may satisfy the obligation of producing a privilege log.
Flooring Depot FTL, Inc. v. Wurtzebach, Case No. 4D20-1787 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).
A claimant must prove three factors by a preponderance of the evidence to pierce the corporate veil:(1) the shareholder dominated and controlled the corporation tosuch an extent that the corporation’s independent existence, was infact non-existent and the shareholders were in fact alter egos of thecorporation;(2) the corporate form must have been used fraudulently or for animproper purpose; and(3) the fraudulent or improper use of the corporate form causedinjury to the claimant.
Hobe-St. Lucie Conservancy District v. Martin County, Case No. 4D20-2036 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).
A “tax” is an enforced burden of contribution imposed bysovereign for the support of the government while a specialassessment is imposed on that portion of the community whichreceives some special or peculiar benefit in theenhancement of value of the property against which the assessment isimposed.
Auction Company of America v. Russell Revocable Trust, Case No. 3D20-1914 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021).
An auctioneer does not have a general, non-contractual legal duty to collect a deposit from a bidder before allowing a bid to be placed at auction.
Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC v. Nicolas, Case Nos. 3D21-1300, 3D21-1304, 3D21-1311, and 3D21-1320 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021).
A trial judge hearing a disputed factual issue should not issue an order to show cause why a witness should not be held in contempt as the result of the witness’s testimony.
El Brazo Fuerte Bakery 2 v. 24 Hour Air Service, Inc., Case No. 4D21-531 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).
A trial court may not reduce a prevailing party’s requested hourly rate (and the expert’s requested hourlyrate) absent competent substantial evidence or specific findings for such reductions.
Jain v. Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC, Case No. 3D20-1529 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021).
Florida Statute section 768.79 awards fees paid by a party as well as those paid on the party’s behalf, and accordingly, a prevailing defendant may be awarded attorney’s fees even if his firm (not him) paid his fees under an indemnification agreement.
K.D. Construction of Florida, Inc. v. MDM Retail, Ltd., Case No. 3D20-1759 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021).
Florida Statute section 713.10 cannot be used by an owner/landlord to escape liability for unpaid construction charges when the owner/landlord personally contracted for the improvements, recorded the notices of commencement, and was contractually obligated to pay for the improvements.
Cocoplum Civic Association, Inc. v. City of Coral Gables, Case No. 3D21-1569 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021).
The Third District holds that “second-tier certiorari may not be utilized to challenge simple legal error, but only in instances where the petitioner establishes a violation of a clearly established principle of law resulting in a miscarriage of justice.”
Millan Law Firm, P.A. v. Zambrano, Case No. 3D21-1726 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021).
Records regarding payments to law firms typically do not implicate either the attorney-client or work product privileges.
McGregor v. Fowler White Burnett, P.A., Case No. 4D20-2684 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).
Fraudulent transfer claims brought under Florida Statute section 56.29 (proceedings supplementary) are subject to the time limitations of Florida Statute chapter 726 (fraudulent conveyances) and thus can be barred by the application of Florida Statute section 726.110.
Blue Water Holdings SRC, Inc. v. Santa Rosa County, Florida, Case No. 1D19-4387 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021).
The purpose of appraisals under the Bert Harris Act, Florida Statute section 70.001 (2012), is to give notice to the government to allow it to fairly assess the claim and the appraisals need not be “before and after,” i.e., appraisals before and after the inordinate government regulation which show the diminution in value due to the government regulation, nor admissible in evidence by themselves.
The Solomon Law Group, P.A. v. Dovenmuehle Mortgage, Inc., Case No. 2D21-360 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021).
Forum selection clauses, being a contractual right and not a grant of jurisdiction, neither give jurisdiction to nor remove jurisdiction from a particular court, and being a contractual right, can be waived by the actions of the party invoking the clause.