Admissions By A Party Opponent

199 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• United States v. Lebron-Gonzalez
  816 F.2d 823· 1st Cir.· 1987-04-24 ·cited 13×
  The court affirmed convictions, holding that the admission of a birth certificate was harmless error, expert testimony was permissible, and jury instructions adequately covered the relevant statutes and legal standards.
• Symonette v. State
  100 So. 3d 180· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-10-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that photographs of text messages from the defendant's phone were properly admitted into evidence because they were sufficiently authenticated and constituted admissible hearsay as party admissions.
• United States v. Rubio-Villareal
  927 F.2d 1495· 9th Cir.· 1991-03-13 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the evidence was insufficient to support conspiracy convictions and that a jury instruction regarding knowledge impermissibly shifted the burden of proof, requiring reversal and a new trial for possession charges.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Mmahat
  907 F.2d 546· 5th Cir.· 1990-08-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the law firm's dishonesty exclusion from malpractice insurance coverage was valid, but remanded for credit for amounts paid by settling defendants.
• Staheli v. The Univ. OF Miss.
  854 F.2d 121· 5th Cir.· 1988-09-09 ·cited 12×
  A non-tenured professor does not have a constitutionally protected property interest in continued employment based on informal assurances that conflict with a formal tenure policy. Furthermore, a jury's finding that protected speech was not a substantial factor in a tenure denial
• Brooks v. Chrysler Corp.
  786 F.2d 1191· D.C. Cir.· 1986-03-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence of prior occurrences under Federal Rule of Evidence 403 because its probative value was substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice, trial delay, and jury confusion.
• Carter v. Musa Tony Rukab & S.C. Ins. Co.
  437 So. 2d 761· Fla. 1st DCA· 1983-09-12 ·cited 12×
  The Carters appealed a jury verdict denying them recovery in a personal injury suit arising from a car accident. The trial court admitted evidence of Mrs. Carter's traffic citation and guilty plea to running a red light, which the appellate court held was reversible error because
• Wright v. Farmers Co-Op OF Ark. & Okla.
  681 F.2d 549· 8th Cir.· 1982-06-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a transcribed statement of an employee was admissible as an admission by a party-opponent and under the business records exception, and that supplemental jury instructions and consideration of permanence of injuries and loss of consortium were proper, subject
• United States v. David E. Thompson, Inc.
  621 F.2d 1147· 1st Cir.· 1980-04-23 ·cited 12×
  The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court did not err in refusing a nolo contendere plea, admitting coconspirator statements, admitting certain evidence, or in its jury instructions, and that sufficient evidence supported the finding of a single, ongoing con
• Dontae R. Morris v. State
  233 So. 3d 438· Fla.· 2018-01-11 ·cited 11×
  Dontae Morris appeals his conviction for first-degree murder and death sentence in the 2010 shooting death of Derek Anderson. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the conviction based on substantial evidence, including a confession to a witness and cell phone records, but vacated t
• Rock v. Huffco GAS & OIL Co.
  922 F.2d 272· 5th Cir.· 1991-01-31 ·cited 11×
  The court held that statements made by the injured employee to his physicians, contained in medical records, accident reports, and to family members, were inadmissible hearsay and did not meet the exceptions to the hearsay rule.
• Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. First Interstate Bank OF DES Moines, N.A.
  885 F.2d 423· 8th Cir.· 1989-09-11 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the jury instructions on aiding and abetting were proper and that sufficient evidence supported the jury's finding that the bank knowingly provided substantial assistance to the fraud.
• H.B.A. Mgmt., Inc. v. The Est. OF May Schwartz
  693 So. 2d 541· Fla.· 1997-05-01 ·cited 10×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that Rule of Professional Conduct 4-4.2 does not prohibit a claimant's attorney from engaging in ex parte communications with former employees of a defendant-employer, resolving a conflict between district court decisions and aligning Florida law wi
• Am. Press, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  833 F.2d 621· 6th Cir.· 1987-11-20 ·cited 10×
  The court held that American Press was a successor employer that engaged in unfair labor practices by discriminating against unionized employees in hiring, and that its failure to hire certain employees was not motivated by anti-union animus.
• United States v. Womochil
  778 F.2d 1311· 8th Cir.· 1985-12-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in admitting evidence obtained through wiretaps and oral communications, nor in admitting certain hearsay statements under the coconspirator exception, and that alleged prosecutorial misconduct did not warrant a mistrial.
• Shell v. Parrish
  448 F.2d 528· 6th Cir.· 1971-09-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court erred in excluding a portion of the death certificate and in failing to submit the issue of parental contributory negligence to the jury.
• DeLOACH v. United States
  307 F.2d 653· D.C. Cir.· 1962-06-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that it was error to admit statements allegedly made by co-defendants in the appellant's presence without identifying the speaker and that such error was not harmless.
• Ash v. Sambodromo, LLC
  676 F. Supp. 2d 1360· S.D. Fla.· 2009-11-17 ·cited 9×
  The court held that there are genuine issues of material fact regarding the plaintiff's minimum wage claims, precluding summary judgment on those issues.
• United States v. McKINNEY
  707 F.2d 381· 9th Cir.· 1983-05-23 ·cited 9×
  The dissenting judge holds that the admission of the appellant's adoptive statement does not violate the Confrontation Clause because the accused is always available to testify and confront their own statements.
• Scofi v. McKEON Constr. Co.
  666 F.2d 170· 5th Cir.· 1982-01-22 ·cited 9×
  The court held that Florida law does not impose an affirmative duty on an owner to take special precautions for employees of an independent contractor performing inherently dangerous work, absent the owner's direct negligence. The court also held that certain testimony was admiss
• Benjamin v. Tandem Healthcare, Inc.
  93 So. 3d 1076· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-06-27 ·cited 8×
  In this wrongful death case against a nursing home, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for a new trial on the issue of whether testimony from a kitchen worker regarding statements about a resident choking should have been admitted, while affirming the trial
• Nat. Aacp v. Fla. Corr.
  122 F. Supp. 2d 1335· M.D. Fla.· 2000-09-21 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the magistrate judge's order allowing plaintiffs to conduct ex parte interviews of current and former employees of the Department of Corrections, subject to specific guidelines and protective measures.
• Guitterez v. State
  704 So. 2d 161· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-12-10 ·cited 8×
• United States v. GAF Corp.
  928 F.2d 1253· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-18 ·cited 8×
  Bills of particulars are not inadmissible per se, but their admission as evidence is exceptional and requires compelling circumstances.
• United States v. Cleta Barrington
  806 F.2d 529· 5th Cir.· 1986-12-08 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the conviction, finding that while the admission of officer testimony was error, it was harmless, and the double jeopardy claim lacked merit.
• Simmons v. Hoegh Lines
  784 F.2d 1234· 5th Cir.· 1986-03-14 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the erroneous admission of a stipulation detailing collateral benefits and the admission of unauthenticated interrogatory answers constituted reversible error.
• United States v. Felix-Jerez
  667 F.2d 1297· 9th Cir.· 1982-02-16 ·cited 8×
  Statements made through an interpreter, if voluntary and accurately translated, are not hearsay and are admissible as the party-opponent's own statement or as an agent's statement.
• Ackerman v. State
  372 So. 2d 215· Fla. 1st DCA· 1979-06-29 ·cited 8×
• United States v. Eisenberg
  596 F.2d 522· 2d Cir.· 1979-03-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction for conspiracy and aiding and abetting the transportation of counterfeit checks, and that the admission of certain hearsay testimony and the jury instructions were proper.
• Butler v. S. Pac. Co.
  431 F.2d 77· 5th Cir.· 1970-08-27 ·cited 8×
  The exclusion of a safety report, which constituted an admission by the defendant and was trustworthy evidence, was an error requiring a new trial.
• Wong KEN Foon v. Brownell
  218 F.2d 444· 9th Cir.· 1955-01-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the admission of prior inconsistent testimony was proper and that the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion.
• Jones v. Publix Super Mkts., Inc.
  114 So. 3d 998· Fla. 5th DCA· 2012-07-27 ·cited 7×
  The Joneses appealed a judgment in favor of Publix after Mr. Jones fell in a Publix store. The appellate court reversed and remanded, finding that Publix violated discovery rules by withholding a key witness's address for years, and that the trial court erred in excluding testimo
• Anne Visconti and Joseph Visconti v. Hollywood Rental Serv.
  580 So. 2d 197· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-04-24 ·cited 7×
  Mrs. Visconti appealed a jury verdict finding no negligence after her slip-and-fall at defendant's apartment complex. The Fourth District reversed and remanded for a new trial because the trial court erroneously admitted hospital records containing inadmissible hearsay statements
• Sylvis v. State
  916 So. 2d 915· Fla. 5th DCA· 2005-11-18 ·cited 6×
  William Sylvis appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging the Florida Parole Commission's revocation of his parole for violating a no-contact condition. The appellate court treated the appeal as a petition for certiorari and denied relief, finding the circuit c
• Johnson v. Scotty's, Inc.
  119 F. Supp. 2d 1276· M.D. Fla.· 2000-09-07 ·cited 6×
  The court granted in part and denied in part the defendant's motion to strike affidavits and denied the defendant's motion for summary judgment.
• Costa v. The Sch. Bd. OF Broward Cnty.
  701 So. 2d 414· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-11-12 ·cited 6×
  The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed a jury verdict for a high school teacher who claimed retaliation for whistleblowing, finding the trial court improperly excluded evidence of an internal investigation's findings. The court also dismissed claims against an individual p
• Lang v. Reedy Creek Improvement Dist.
  888 F. Supp. 1143· M.D. Fla.· 1995-03-28 ·cited 6×
  Ex parte communications with former employees are permissible under ethical rules with specific guidelines, but contact with current employees is prohibited absent consent due to higher risks of ethical violations.
• Gacy v. Welborn
  994 F.2d 305· 7th Cir.· 1993-04-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a minor slip of the tongue in a jury instruction, when corrected by written instructions and defense counsel's argument, did not render the death sentence unconstitutional. Furthermore, a study on juror comprehension, even if accurate, could not overcome estab
• Frensley v. Nat'l Fire Ins. Co. of Hartford
  856 F.2d 1199· 8th Cir.· 1988-09-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that exculpatory clauses in fair entry forms and booklets were valid and enforceable under Arkansas law, and that any errors in admitting or excluding evidence were harmless.
• United States v. Freddy Valencia
  826 F.2d 169· 2d Cir.· 1987-08-05 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge would hold that statements made by an attorney during bail negotiations, which were intended to exculpate the client, should have been admitted as admissions by a party opponent under Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(C) and (D).
• Stepney v. Lopes
  760 F.2d 40· 2d Cir.· 1985-04-16 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a federal habeas petitioner who procedurally defaulted a constitutional claim in state court must demonstrate cause and prejudice for the default to obtain federal review, even if the state appellate court did not explicitly rule on the default.
• Nance v. United States
  299 F.2d 122· D.C. Cir.· 1962-01-25 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appellant's question asked during a preliminary hearing, which served as an admission, was properly admitted into evidence. The court also found sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict.
• United States v. Avellino
  216 F.2d 875· 3d Cir.· 1954-11-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict of guilty against Avellino for bank robbery and conspiracy.
• Peralta-Morales v. State
  143 So. 3d 483· Fla. 1st DCA· 2014-07-30 ·cited 5×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, holding that the admission of collateral crime evidence was not an abuse of discretion.
• Dieguez v. Dept. of Law Enf't
  947 So. 2d 591· Fla. 3d DCA· 2007-01-03 ·cited 5×
  Jesse Dieguez, a certified police officer, appeals the revocation of his law enforcement certification by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission based on allegations of lewd and lascivious conduct with a minor stepdaughter. The court affirmed the revocation, findi
• Haynes v. State
  729 So. 2d 498· Fla. 1st DCA· 1999-03-30 ·cited 5×
  The court held that claims of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding failure to challenge unwarned statements, exclude collateral crimes evidence, and object to tainted identifications were facially sufficient and required further proceedings.
• Davis v. Mobil OIL Exploration & Producing Se., Inc.
  864 F.2d 1171· 5th Cir.· 1989-02-06 ·cited 5×
  The court held that Mobil's employee's statement was admissible as a party admission, the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding of Mobil's liability, but the award for future medical expenses was not supported by sufficient evidence.
• Noack v. State
  260 So. 3d 1172· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-12-27 ·cited 4×
  A defendant's pre-trial waiver of Rule 3.191 speedy trial time limits continues to apply after appellate reversal and remand for retrial, unless the defendant moved for discharge before the first trial. Alternatively, a defendant may revoke a pre-trial waiver by filing a demand f
• Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. v. Poling
  823 So. 2d 805· Fla. 5th DCA· 2002-06-07 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court reversed a final judgment for the plaintiff in an uninsured motorist benefits case, finding the trial court erred by excluding the plaintiff's pre-accident application for social security benefits detailing his physical limitations.
• Schneider v. TRW, Inc.
  938 F.2d 986· 9th Cir.· 1991-07-10 ·cited 4×
  Summary judgment for the employer is affirmed because the employee failed to raise a triable issue of material fact regarding her claims, including that her layoff was due to a legitimate reduction in force and not discriminatory reasons.