Preponderance Of The Evidence

3,086 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 56 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Brumley-Donaldson Co. v. Commissioner OF Internal Revenue
  443 F.2d 501· 9th Cir.· 1971-05-12 ·cited 4×·via Burden Of Proof By Preponderance Of The Evidence
  The court held that the Tax Court's finding that the principal purpose for acquiring St. Louis was tax avoidance was not clearly erroneous, and thus the net operating loss carryover was disallowed under Section 269.
• Tuten v. Black
  247 So. 2d 67· Fla. 1st DCA· 1971-04-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding that the decedent consciously suffered pain between the accident and death.
• Glover v. Daniel
  434 F.2d 617· 5th Cir.· 1970-11-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that his non-rehire was racially motivated.
• Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Cook
  419 F.2d 1296· 7th Cir.· 1969-11-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's finding of no reliance on the appraisal was supported by substantial evidence and not clearly erroneous.
• Paivinen v. Sands
  399 F.2d 697· C.C.P.A.· 1968-09-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Paivinen parent application did not inherently support the 'incapable of reversing' limitation, but that Paivinen's proofs established a corroborated reduction to practice beyond a reasonable doubt, satisfying his burden of proof.
• Cobb v. Fla. Publ'g Co.
  31 Fla. Supp. 112· Duval Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1968-06-28 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a new trial must be granted when the jury instructions fail to require the constitutionally mandated "clear and convincing" standard of proof for actual malice, even if the issue was not timely raised.
• Ashland OIL & Ref. Co. v. Kenny Constr. Co.
  395 F.2d 683· 6th Cir.· 1968-05-29 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's finding that the plaintiff failed to prove the defendant's blasting proximately caused the damage was not clearly erroneous and was supported by substantial evidence.
• Wells Fargo Armored Serv. Corp. OF Fla. v. Mason
  196 So. 2d 419· Fla.· 1966-12-14 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Supreme Court reversed the Public Service Commission's grant of a certificate of public convenience and necessity to Armored Express Service, Inc., to operate as an armored carrier in Dade County. The Court held that the applicant failed to meet the statutory standard
• THE Florida BAR v. Rose
  187 So. 2d 329· Fla.· 1966-03-16 ·cited 4×
  The Florida Bar disciplined attorney William Lamar Rose for professional misconduct on two counts: failing to diligently prosecute a client's civil case and making a false statement to a criminal defendant client while improperly retaining bond proceeds as an excessive fee. The F
• Lauray v. Lauray
  181 So. 2d 670· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-01-13 ·cited 4×
  This case involves an appeal from a divorce decree where the appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision. The court emphasized that it would not substitute its judgment for the chancellor's unless there was a clear abuse of discretion or a complete lack of proof.
• Stack v. Bomar
  354 F.2d 200· 6th Cir.· 1965-12-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant was not deprived of effective assistance of counsel, as his attorney's advice was based on the prevailing Tennessee law at the time, and the guilty plea was voluntary and informed.
• Beeler v. Crouse
  332 F.2d 783· 10th Cir.· 1964-06-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court's findings were supported by sufficient evidence and were not clearly erroneous.
• In re Est. of Harold E. Rodgers
  149 So. 2d 391· Fla. 1st DCA· 1963-02-05 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order denying a change of venue, finding no clear error in the determination of the decedent's domicile.
• Collignon v. Larson
  145 So. 2d 246· Fla. 1st DCA· 1962-09-18 ·cited 4×
  A licensed life insurance agent appealed an administrative order finding him guilty of violating Florida's insurance trade practices statutes by preparing a comparative analysis of insurance policies that allegedly contained misrepresentations and misleading statements. The Distr
• Digna Barrios v. Waterman S.S. Corp.
  290 F.2d 310· 5th Cir.· 1961-05-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the plaintiff failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the defendant's negligence proximately caused the seaman's death.
• Young v. Riddell
  283 F.2d 909· 9th Cir.· 1960-11-19 ·cited 4×
  A secret or dormant general partner is personally liable for partnership tax debts, including interest and penalties, even after the partnership's bankruptcy discharge.
• United States v. Mrs. W. B. Wood, Jr.
  226 F.2d 924· 4th Cir.· 1955-11-07 ·cited 4×
  The court held that expert testimony, even without personal use of the drug, is competent to establish the ineffectiveness of a drug for treating diabetes, and that animal studies can be valid evidence of physiological effects.
• Ipava Farmers Elevator Co. v. Hawkeye-Security Ins. Co.
  222 F.2d 833· 7th Cir.· 1955-05-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the jury's findings that the employee caused the loss, the plaintiff did not commit fraud, and the plaintiff provided timely notice of the loss.
• Martin v. Handy-Andy Cmty. Stores, Inc.
  214 F.2d 10· 5th Cir.· 1954-06-30 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the exclusion of the store manager's statement was harmless error because other evidence of notice was sufficient, and the jury's findings were supported by the evidence.
• Cislak v. Wagner
  215 F.2d 275· C.C.P.A.· 1954-05-27 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant failed to establish an earlier conception or reduction to practice than the appellee, and affirmed the Board of Interference Examiners' decision awarding priority to the appellee.
• De Benneville v. Anderson
  212 F.2d 612· C.C.P.A.· 1954-04-09 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant failed to prove reduction to practice of the invention as defined by the count because the experiments were not performed at a temperature of "about 0°C."
• Brown v. Coward
  69 So. 2d 174· Fla.· 1953-12-11 ·cited 4×
  Brown sought to rescind an option agreement to purchase an orange grove, claiming the sellers made false representations about the property. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's decision to deny rescission, holding that Brown failed to prove misrepresentation and
• Rodli v. Phillippi
  154 F.2d 139· C.C.P.A.· 1946-03-06 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Board of Interference Examiners' findings of fact regarding priority of invention were supported by credible testimony and should be affirmed.
• Driggs v. Clark
  140 F.2d 994· C.C.P.A.· 1944-01-04 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the Patent Office tribunals correctly found that the applicant Clark conceived the invention on December 14, 1936, and that the opposing inventors derived the invention from Clark.
• Fersing v. Fast
  121 F.2d 531· C.C.P.A.· 1941-07-02 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the appellant failed to meet the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that he was the first inventor, and therefore, priority of invention was correctly awarded to the senior party.
• Int'l Harvester Co. of Am. v. Archer Smith and Edward L. Anderson
  51 Fla. 220· Fla.· 1906-01-01 ·cited 4×
  International Harvester sued defendants Smith and Anderson on a promissory note for $120. The defendants claimed they paid the note to J.B. Gaston, the plaintiff's local agent, and the jury found in their favor. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the plaintiff's age
• Jacksonville v. Hunter
  26 Fla. 308· Fla.· 1890-06-01 ·cited 4×
  The Jacksonville, Tampa & Key West Railway Company appealed a judgment for $150 awarded to Jesse Hunter for a horse killed by the railway's train. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, finding the jury verdict was supported by sufficient evidence and properly instructe
• See State v. Floray
  Del. Super. Ct.· 2026-02-13 ·cited 3×
  In this criminal case involving child sexual abuse allegations, the Delaware Superior Court addressed whether a defense expert forensic psychologist could testify regarding the reliability of child interviews and interviewing techniques. The court granted in part the State's moti
• Lamonaco v. Experian Info. Solutions, Inc.
  141 F.4th 1343· 11th Cir.· 2025-07-03 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the Federal Arbitration Act requires enforcement of arbitration agreements, including delegation clauses, and that the evidence presented was sufficient to establish an agreement to arbitrate.
• Isaiah JOE Bean v. State
  388 So. 3d 300· Fla. 6th DCA· 2024-04-05 ·cited 3×·via Burden Of Proof By Preponderance Of The Evidence
  Isaiah Joe Bean appeals the revocation of his probation based on multiple alleged violations. The appellate court reverses and remands, finding that the trial court improperly relied on violations not charged in the state's affidavits and on violations unsupported by competent, s
• The Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Calvary Chapel Church, Inc.
  367 So. 3d 512· Fla. 4th DCA· 2023-06-21 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's decision that a bank lacked standing to foreclose on a mortgage. The court held that circumstantial evidence regarding a loan modification agreement did not sufficiently rebut the direct evidence of the bank's standing through assignme
• State v. P.C.L.
  332 So. 3d 4· Fla. 4th DCA· 2022-01-05 ·cited 3×
  The State appealed a trial court's order denying restitution for property damage and lost income caused by a juvenile. The appellate court affirmed the denial for damage to a gate and loss of use of a vehicle, but reversed and remanded for further proceedings regarding restitutio
• Naples Ests. Ltd. P'ship v. Glasby
  331 So. 3d 863· Fla. 2d DCA· 2021-12-29 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, finding that the appellant, Naples Estates, failed to demonstrate reversible error in the denial of its claim for additional unpaid rent. The court emphasized that it could not act as a fact-finder and must defer to the tri
• Inteam Assocs., LLC v. Heartland Payment Sys., LLC
  2018 WL 1560058· Del. Ch.· 2021-10-29 ·cited 3×
  The court denied inTEAM's motion for a rule to show cause, finding that Heartland did not violate the prior injunction. The court held that Heartland's software's ability to export data, its proposals to state agencies, and its alleged data analysis functionality did not constitu
• Romero v. State
  300 So. 3d 794· Fla. 5th DCA· 2020-07-23 ·cited 3×
  Carlos Romero appeals the revocation of his probation after being found guilty of willfully trespassing on property he had been warned away from the previous day. The majority affirms, finding the trial court's credibility finding and conclusion of willful violation supported by
• United States Auto. Ass'n v. BAY Area Injury Rehab Specialists Holdings, Inc.
  311 So. 3d 172· Fla. 2d DCA· 2020-07-17 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court denied a petition for certiorari review of a trial court order compelling the production of documents. The petitioner failed to preserve the documents for appellate review by not filing them under seal, making it impossible for the appellate court to review th
• Demare v. State
  44 Fla. L. Weekly D644· Fla. 2d DCA· 2020-06-26 ·cited 3×
  Jason DeMare was convicted of traveling to meet a minor after a law enforcement sting operation. The Florida Second District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the undisputed facts established DeMare's subjective entrapment defense as a matter of law because law enforcement i
• Rodriguez v. State
  299 So. 3d 555· Fla. 5th DCA· 2020-06-12 ·cited 3×
  A trial court's erroneous denial of a downward departure sentence based on one mitigating factor is harmless error when the court properly identified an alternative valid mitigating factor and exercised its discretion not to depart under the two-step Banks analysis.
• Washington v. State
  296 So. 3d 567· Fla. 1st DCA· 2020-05-19 ·cited 3×
  A procedural amendment to Florida's Stand-Your-Ground statute that shifts the burden of proof to the State applies only to immunity hearings conducted on or after the statute's effective date, not retroactively to cases pending on appeal at the time of the amendment.
• Anthony v. Nieves Vs State of Fla.
  277 So. 3d 745· Fla. 2d DCA· 2019-08-02 ·cited 3×
  An essential element of the offense of resisting arrest without violence is that the arrest must be lawful; where police conduct a warrantless entry into a place protected by the Fourth Amendment without satisfying an exception to the warrant requirement, the arrest is unlawful a
• In re Standard Jury Instructions in Crim. Cases - Report 2018-12
  272 So. 3d 243· Fla.· 2019-05-30 ·cited 3×
  The Florida Supreme Court authorized proposed amendments to standard jury instructions in criminal drug cases, consolidating multiple trafficking instructions into one flexible instruction and revising affirmative defense language regarding knowledge of the illicit nature of cont
• Bravo v. State
  268 So. 3d 193· Fla. 2d DCA· 2018-12-12 ·cited 3×
  Maria Bravo appeals the revocation of her community control and resulting three-year prison sentence. The appellate court reversed, finding that the State failed to prove Bravo willfully and substantially violated her community control condition requiring her to remain confined t
• Raimondi v. State
  253 So. 3d 749· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-08-15 ·cited 3×
  Revocation of community control cannot be affirmed when the affidavit of violation upon which the revocation was based is absent from the appellate record, as this prevents appellate review of whether the violations alleged match the evidence presented. The case must be remanded
• Thompson v. State
  250 So. 3d 132· Fla. 1st DCA· 2018-05-17 ·cited 3×
  The trial court properly revoked Thompson's probation based on competent, substantial evidence of willful and substantial violation of the monetary payment conditions. A probationer's failure to make reasonable efforts to obtain employment is relevant to whether she made bona fid
• Rodriguez v. State
  239 So. 3d 147· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-02-07 ·cited 3×
  A writ of prohibition is unavailable to challenge a trial court's application of the pre-amendment Stand Your Ground burden of proof when the trial court has not yet ruled on the defendant's immunity motion. Constitutional and retroactivity questions regarding the 2017 amendment
• Junk v. State
  230 So. 3d 984· Fla. 1st DCA· 2017-11-30 ·cited 3×
  A probation revocation order may be affirmed even though two alleged violations lack oral pronouncements, when the remaining violations are substantial and willful, and the trial court properly sentenced the probationer to a term authorized by statute for the underlying offense.
• Audely Hernandez v. Yosviel Guerra & Dep't of Revenue
  230 So. 3d 514· Fla. 3d DCA· 2017-10-11 ·cited 3×
  A mother appealed a Final Administrative Support Order challenging the amount of credit awarded to the father for child support payments made during the retroactive period. The court affirmed the administrative law judge's finding that the father made $5,759 in payments (cash and
• State v. Mundegerick Mitchum
  227 So. 3d 697· Fla. 5th DCA· 2017-09-01 ·cited 3×
  The trial court erred in dismissing violation of probation charges solely because the State nolle prossed the underlying criminal charge.
• Barone v. State
  222 So. 3d 1235· Fla. 5th DCA· 2017-07-21 ·cited 3×·via Burden Of Proof By Preponderance Of The Evidence
  Stephen Vincent Barone appealed his convictions for organized fraud, identity theft, grand theft, and money laundering. The appellate court affirmed all convictions and sentences but reversed the restitution order because it was entered without a hearing, requiring remand for pro
• Barrington Parague v. State
  222 So. 3d 567· Fla. 4th DCA· 2017-06-07 ·cited 3×
  Barrington Parague appealed his convictions for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon and felony battery, as well as a $30,000 restitution order. The court affirmed the convictions but reversed the restitution order, finding it was the product of improper coercion by the trial