232 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 752 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort
-
The Court accepts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, reversing the Commissioner's decision and remanding the matter for further consideration.
-
The court held that the Administrative Law Judge's decision denying disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence and proper legal standards, and therefore affirmed the Commissioner's decision.
-
The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, denying defendants' motions for sanctions.
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation and denied the defendant's motion for permission to appeal in forma pauperis.
-
The Court adopts the magistrate judge's report and recommendation regarding attorney fees and costs.
-
The court held that the ALJ's reasons for finding a medical expert's opinion partially persuasive were not supported by substantial evidence, requiring reversal.
-
The court held that the Administrative Law Judge erred by applying the incorrect regulations when evaluating medical opinions for a claim filed before the regulatory change.
-
The court held that the ALJ's decision denying disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence and applied the correct legal standard, affirming the Commissioner's decision.
-
The court held that the ALJ's decision to find Dr. Zenoni's opinion unpersuasive was not supported by substantial evidence, and the ALJ's RFC assessment may not have fully accounted for the claimant's carpal tunnel syndrome.
-
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding the ALJ's determination that the plaintiff was not disabled was supported by substantial evidence.
-
The court held that the ALJ failed to adequately explain why the plaintiff's lupus did not meet a disability listing and directed reconsideration of the RFC. The decision of the Commissioner is reversed and remanded.
-
The court held that the Commissioner's decision denying disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence and applied the correct legal standard, affirming the denial.
-
The court held that the Commissioner's decision denying supplemental security income benefits was supported by substantial evidence and applied the correct legal standard.
-
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's finding that a juvenile's waiver of Miranda rights was knowing and voluntary, but reversed and remanded the case because the trial court failed to specify the length of the juvenile's probation.
-
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's finding that a juvenile's waiver of Miranda rights was knowing and voluntary, but reversed and remanded the case because the trial court failed to specify the length of the juvenile's probation.
-
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's finding that a juvenile's waiver of Miranda rights was knowing and voluntary, but reversed and remanded the case because the trial court failed to specify the length of the juvenile's probation. This case clarifies the "totality of t
-
Fla. 4th DCA·
2022-08-10
The appellate court affirmed a trial court's summary judgment ruling in a small claims case. The appellant argued the trial court erred by not stating its reasons for the ruling on the record, but the appellate court found that Florida Small Claims Rule 7.135, not the general civ
-
The court affirmed the Bankruptcy Court's denial of disgorgement and sanctions, finding no abuse of discretion in its application of legal standards and factual findings.
-
The Court accepts and adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting the Plaintiff's unopposed motion for attorney's fees.
-
The court held that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) failed to adequately articulate reasons for discrediting the claimant's subjective complaints of fibromyalgia, particularly by relying too heavily on the lack of objective medical evidence.
-
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the ALJ's evaluation of medical opinions and application of the correct legal standard.
-
The court held that the Commissioner's decision denying disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence and applied the correct legal standard.
-
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding that the ALJ's determination that the plaintiff was not disabled was supported by substantial evidence and that the correct legal standard was applied.
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to enter default judgment against the defendant, modifying the resolution regarding certain counts.
-
The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to grant in part and deny in part the plaintiff's motion to review the clerk's bill of costs.
-
The court affirmed the Social Security Administration's decision denying disability benefits, finding the ALJ's conclusions were supported by substantial evidence and that the plaintiff failed to show prejudice from any alleged failure to develop the record.
-
The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, striking a modification clause from the settlement agreement and approving the settlement as amended.
-
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding the ALJ provided adequate reasoning supported by substantial evidence when evaluating the medical opinions of record.
-
The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to deny the application to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the case.
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to grant Banner Life's motion to deposit funds but denied its request for attorney's fees and costs.
-
The court held that the ALJ failed to properly consider and incorporate Dr. Buffone's opinion, requiring reversal and remand.
-
The court accepted and adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting the motion to determine entitlement to attorneys' fees.
-
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding substantial evidence supported the ALJ's determination that benefits were properly calculated and offset.
-
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding it supported by substantial evidence and that the correct legal standard was applied.
-
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding the ALJ properly evaluated medical opinions and subjective complaints based on substantial evidence.
-
The court held that the ALJ's decision to cease disability benefits was supported by substantial evidence and applied the correct legal standard, affirming the Commissioner's decision.
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to reverse the Commissioner's decision and remand the case for reconsideration.
-
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding that the ALJ properly considered the claimant's subjective complaints of pain and mental impairments, and that the decision was supported by substantial evidence.
-
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision, finding that the ALJ's determination that the plaintiff was not disabled was supported by substantial evidence and applied the correct legal standard.
-
The court held that the ALJ properly considered the medical opinion and did not err in finding no conflict between the vocational expert's testimony and the DOT, affirming the Commissioner's decision.
-
The Commissioner's decision denying disability benefits is affirmed because the ALJ's findings were supported by substantial evidence and proper legal standards, including proper consideration of medical opinions and the claimant's bipolar disorder.
-
The court held that the Administrative Law Judge's (ALJ) decision denying Supplemental Security Income (SSI) was supported by substantial evidence and proper legal standards, affirming the Commissioner's decision.
-
The court held that the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) adequately evaluated the medical opinion of Dr. Arriola and that the Commissioner's decision denying benefits was supported by substantial evidence.
-
The Commissioner's decision was reversed and remanded for the Administrative Law Judge to further evaluate medical opinion evidence from Dr. Freedman and Dr. Kasprzak, focusing on supportability and consistency factors.
-
Fla. 2d DCA·
2022-03-30
The appellate court reversed a summary judgment of foreclosure, finding that the bank failed to adequately refute the borrower's affirmative defense of equitable estoppel. The court determined that genuine issues of material fact existed regarding the bank's alleged misrepresenta
-
The court held that the ALJ failed to properly evaluate a physician assistant's opinion and the claimant's subjective allegations, requiring remand.
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to grant in part and deny in part the motion for attorney's fees, awarding $40,677.88.
-
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to grant Plaintiff's motion for default judgment against defaulted defendants.
-
The court affirmed the Commissioner's decision denying supplemental security income, adopting the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation.
-
Fla. 3d DCA·
2022-03-09
United Automobile Insurance Company appealed trial court orders awarding attorney's fees to Coastal Radiology in two consolidated PIP benefits cases. After United stipulated to liability and confessed judgment, the trial court granted attorney's fees to five attorneys for Coastal