Search

The article analyzes whether the Daubert standard govern admissibility of expert witness testimony in civil and criminal proceedings under the Florida Administrative Procedure Act. Topics discussed include applicability of the rule of sequestration in Fla. Indus. Power Users Grp. v. Graham, reliability of expert testimony in the SDI Quarry case against a mining company for compensatory damages to a man-made lake, and discretion of administrative law judges to apply Daubert in several cases.

The article explains the grounds for decision on the merits in the context of an extraordinary writ petition. Issues discussed include entitlement to a second or third opportunity for the same relief by the same writ in a different court in Jenkins v. Wainwright, unelaborated denial of an extraordinary writ petition and the principles of res judicata and collateral estoppel in Topps v. State, difference between judicial finality and discretion, and per curiam affirmed decision.

The article discusses the appellate law-related implications of trial court motions for rehearing under Florida law as of 2017, and it mentions the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, the Florida Supreme Court's amendment to the state's Common Law Rule 41(a) rehearing rule. Judicial discretion and standards of review are assessed, along with preservation of error requirements, motions to reopen, and summary judgments motions. Several Florida-based litigation matters are mentioned.

The article focuses on the Florida law which permits shifting the cost of production from the responding party to the requesting party, in the electronically stored information (ESI) context. Topics include courts generally granted broad discretion when ruling on discovery issues under Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.280 (General Provisions Governing Discovery) provision, and the manner in which ESI is kept ultimately determining whether a court will shift discovery costs.

The article discusses a reported debate over whether mandatory sexual offender probation conditions contained in Section 948.30(1) of the Florida Statutes must be imposed on defendants who are sentenced as youthful offenders as of April 2014. A Florida court in the 2004 case State v. Miller apparently ruled that the statute's "must impose" language does impose the mandatory probation conditions on youthful offenders. Judicial discretion and Florida's Youthful Offender Act are examined.

The article focuses on the principle of priority which allows the first-field legal action to proceed when there are concurrent jurisdictions over a dispute in Florida. It cites that the principle, which is enforceable to all cases, is used to avoid jurisdictional conflicts and applicable to sovereign jurisdictions. It states that the state's Supreme Court qualified the principle of priority slightly.

The article discusses the discretionary review jurisdiction of the Florida Supreme Court. It notes that discretionary review of the Supreme Court is stated in the Rules of Appellate Procedure in which one must file a notice within a month in the district court followed by jurisdictional briefs. It cites that Supreme Court's discretionary review certification is rare. The eight types of discretionary review jurisdiction are outlined.

The article discusses the changes and transitions related to the abuse of discretion standards as reviewed by appellate courts in Florida. It mentions that trial courts have a wide freedom to impose a variety of sanctions for failure of compliance by a certain party which can include the dismissal of a case. It relates that discovery violations can come in many forms such as spoliation of evidence of when a party commits fraud in court.

States that judges in Florida have unlimited discretion in sentencing defendants to maximum statutory sentences that can lead to increases in vindictive sentencing claims. Basis for a sentence's reason that exceeds the original offer in Frazier v. State lawsuit; Basic principles for trial judges to enter a plea discussion with defendants.