Due Process (Notice And Opportunity To Be Heard)

33 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• United States v. Blodgett
  709 F.2d 608· 9th Cir.· 1983-07-01 ·cited 59×
  A district court may sanction an attorney for filing a frivolous appeal in bad faith, but must provide notice and a hearing, and sanctions cannot exceed reasonable expenses incurred in opposing the appeal.
• Ocelot OIL Corp. v. Sparrow Indus.
  847 F.2d 1458· 10th Cir.· 1988-05-31 ·cited 43×
  The striking of pleadings with prejudice, even as a discovery sanction, constitutes an involuntary dismissal requiring de novo review by the district court, and a party may waive a hearing on the amount of attorney's fees by failing to contest it.
• Tannenbaum v. Siobhan H. Shea
  133 So. 3d 1056· Fla. 4th DCA· 2014-01-08 ·cited 29×
  A former husband appeals a trial court's order vacating a provision in an agreed child support judgment that divested the court of jurisdiction over a $70,000 money judgment. The appellate court reverses, holding that the divestiture provision did not violate public policy becaus
• In re Longardner & Assocs., Inc.
  855 F.2d 455· 7th Cir.· 1988-08-24 ·cited 19×
  The court held that failure to receive notice of the entry of a confirmation order does not alone provide grounds for extending the time to appeal, and that revocation of a confirmation order requires a showing of actual fraudulent intent, not merely inaccuracies.
• Johnson v. Verne ORR
  776 F.2d 75· 3d Cir.· 1985-10-31 ·cited 18×
  The court held that discussing a potential working condition grievance during duty time does not constitute "internal union business" under 5 U.S.C. § 7131(b), and that a National Guard technician must perform military and civilian duties within the same state's National Guard un
• Bayview Loan Servicing, LLC v. Huso Dzidzovic
  249 So. 3d 1265· Fla. 2d DCA· 2018-06-22 ·cited 15×
  Bayview Loan Servicing appealed a trial court order that vacated a final judgment of foreclosure and dismissed its foreclosure action against Huso Dzidzovic, who claimed to have entered into a loan modification agreement with Bayview after the judgment was entered. The Second Dis
• Niki Unlimited, Inc. v. Legal Servs. OF Greater Miami
  483 So. 2d 46· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-01-14 ·cited 15×
  Niki Unlimited appealed the denial of its motion to set aside a final judgment awarding attorney's fees to Legal Services of Greater Miami. The court affirmed, holding that because the motion for attorney's fees was heard on the merits rather than entered by default, Niki's failu
• Sec. Indus. Ass'n v. Clarke
  898 F.2d 318· 2d Cir.· 1990-03-12 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the district court improperly imposed a Rule 11 sanction on appellant's attorney because the legal arguments made were not frivolous, and the district court failed to provide adequate notice.
• Blouin v. Hon. Nanette Dembitz
  489 F.2d 488· 2d Cir.· 1973-12-13 ·cited 14×
  The court affirmed the dismissal of the § 1983 action, holding that federal courts should abstain from deciding issues of state judicial administration that are best left to state courts.
• The City OF Homestead v. Schild
  227 So. 2d 540· Fla. 3d DCA· 1969-11-04 ·cited 14×
  A zoning ordinance provision allowing special use permits without sufficient legislative standards is invalid, and a permit granted under such an ordinance can be enjoined and cancelled.
• United States v. McQUEARY
  408 F.2d 493· 9th Cir.· 1969-03-04 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to prove notice of reclassification, the Board did not improperly deny a hearing, and the statute conditioning exemptions on religious grounds does not violate the First Amendment.
• Miami Retreat Found. v. Ervin
  62 So. 2d 748· Fla.· 1952-12-19 ·cited 14×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed a lower court decision that had found Miami Retreat Foundation not to be a charitable organization and had removed directors and granted Ruth Reed half the Foundation's assets. The court held that the Foundation qualified as a charitable organiz
• Gelpi v. Tugwell
  123 F.2d 377· 1st Cir.· 1941-11-14 ·cited 14×
  The appeal is dismissed because the plaintiff's term of office has expired, rendering the case moot and making it impossible to grant effectual relief.
• In re The Adoption OF C.L.W. v. Weeks
  467 So. 2d 1106· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-05-01 ·cited 12×
  Betty Fowler appeals a final adoption judgment granted to Helen and Arnold Weeks for her biological child. The Florida appellate court affirmed the adoption, holding that Florida law applied to the validity of the mother's consent and revocation, that Pennsylvania lacked jurisdic
• In re Perry
  918 F.2d 931· Fed. Cir.· 1990-10-30 ·cited 10×
  The court denied Owen E. Perry's motion to intervene as a party, vacate the prior opinion, and hold an evidentiary hearing, upholding its prior finding of a frivolous appeal and imposition of sanctions. Perry was granted leave to intervene only to the extent of having his submiss
• Garcia v. Daniel
  490 F.2d 290· 7th Cir.· 1973-12-28 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a plaintiff discharged for falsifying records is not entitled to back pay or damages for reputational harm when the hearing was delayed, as the hearing's purpose was to clear his name, not to contest the validity of the discharge reason.
• Barrington Manor Apts. Corp. v. The United States
  459 F.2d 499· Ct. Cl.· 1972-05-12 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the agency's denial of an adjusted premium charge exemption was not arbitrary or capricious, and plaintiff was not entitled to a partial refund or interest.
• Wexler v. Md. State Fair, Inc.
  164 F.2d 477· 4th Cir.· 1947-11-22 ·cited 8×
  The court held that summary judgment was improperly granted because genuine issues of material fact and law remained to be determined.
• In the Interest of P.J.
  579 So. 2d 299· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-05-08 ·cited 7×
  A juvenile was adjudicated delinquent for threatening a police officer with death and bodily harm in violation of Florida Statute § 838.021. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction but reversed the assessment of public defender's fees imposed without notice an
• De Long v. Hennessey
  912 F.2d 1144· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while federal courts have inherent power to enjoin vexatious litigants, such orders require notice, an adequate record, substantive findings of frivolousness or harassment, and must be narrowly tailored; otherwise, they are an abuse of discretion.
• Martin v. Johnson
  471 F.2d 704· 6th Cir.· 1973-01-19 ·cited 6×
  A trial judge cannot dismiss a pro se complaint based on material not publicly known, pleaded, or offered in evidence.
• ICG Petroleum, Inc. v. United States Dep't OF Energy & John S. Herrington
  883 F.2d 80· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1989-06-30 ·cited 5×
  The court held that the Petroleum Overcharge Distribution and Restitution Act of 1986 (PODRA) imposed a mandatory time limit for seeking judicial review of certain agency actions, and appellants' failure to file within that period barred their claim.
• Blevins v. Bonita Blevins
  649 So. 2d 315· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-01-26 ·cited 4×
  The trial court erred in awarding the former wife a portion of the husband's temporary retirement benefits because those benefits were not accrued during the marriage; the right to temporary benefits arose from an agreement negotiated after dissolution and cannot be treated as re
• In re Cont'l Inv. Corp.
  642 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1981-01-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in approving a compromise of creditors' claims, finding no merit in the appellants' procedural objections regarding the trustee's report, notice and hearing rights, or SEC advisory reports.
• Shelton v. Smith
  547 F.2d 768· 2d Cir.· 1976-12-28 ·cited 4×
  Abstention was appropriate because the state statute may be interpreted to require a hearing before parental visiting rights are terminated, thus avoiding federal constitutional questions. The denial of a preliminary injunction is also affirmed.
• Gross v. FOX
  496 F.2d 1153· 3d Cir.· 1974-04-12 ·cited 4×
  The court held that declaratory relief was inappropriate because the controversy was moot and the judgment would not terminate the dispute, especially when damages could be sought in a separate, pending action.
• City OF Boca Raton v. Cassady
  167 So. 2d 886· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-10-09 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court affirmed a summary decree that declared the appointments of three defendants to the Civil Service Board void and upheld the appointments of three plaintiffs, enjoining the defendants from acting as board members.
• Rindley v. Gallagher
  890 F. Supp. 1540· S.D. Fla.· 1995-06-21 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the Board Member defendants are entitled to absolute quasi-judicial immunity and qualified immunity for their actions, except for Defendant Bliss. The court also found that the plaintiff has standing to bring claims for selective enforcement and that the statu
• Dep't OF Child. & Families v. K.D.
  45 So. 3d 46· Fla. 5th DCA· 2010-08-20 ·cited 2×
  The trial court erred by declaring a statute unconstitutional without providing the Department of Children and Families notice and an opportunity to be heard. The term 'foster care' in the statute does not encompass placement with a non-relative court-approved guardian.
• Pascoe v. State
  636 So. 2d 603· Fla. 4th DCA· 1994-05-25
  The court held that the trial court erred in assessing public defender fees without notice and in assessing $50.00 in costs when the statute in effect at the time of the offense mandated $20.00.
• Beatrice Foods Co. v. NEW England Printing & Lithographing Co. & Fed. Ins. Co.
  930 F.2d 1572· Fed. Cir.· 1991-04-22
  A supersedeas bond remains in effect when an appeal results in a remand for recalculation of damages, rather than for a determination of whether damages are owed.
• Young v. Riley
  522 So. 2d 988· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-03-25
• United States v. State OF Or.
  769 F.2d 1410· 9th Cir.· 1985-08-29
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in issuing a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of certain fishing regulations, finding they violated the Tribes' treaty fishing rights.