Retroactive Application Of Statutes

2,390 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 320 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Beres Waite v. Singletary
  632 So. 2d 192· Fla. 3d DCA· 1994-02-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the petitioner was not entitled to provisional release credits and could be recommitted, as there is no constitutional impediment to the retroactive cancellation of such credits when an inmate is released by mistake.
• Jean v. State
  627 So. 2d 592· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-12-03 ·cited 10×
  Robert Jean appeals the denial of his motion to correct sentence seeking credit for time served on a split sentence based on the Florida Supreme Court's recent decision in Tripp v. State. The District Court of Appeal reverses, holding that Tripp must be applied retroactively to a
• Garcia v. Carmar Structural
  629 So. 2d 117· Fla.· 1993-11-10 ·cited 10×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a workers' compensation statute (the 1990 Act) amended to chapter 440, Florida Statutes, applies to an injury occurring after its enactment but before it was declared unconstitutional in Martinez v. Scanlan, because substantive rights are fixed
• Zephaniah Meek v. Layne-Western Co. & Crawford & Co.
  624 So. 2d 345· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-09-14 ·cited 10×
  Zephaniah Meek appeals a workers' compensation order calculating wage loss benefits following multiple work injuries. The court reverses and remands, holding that the 1986 version of the wage loss statute applies to injuries occurring before the 1990 amendments, as substantive st
• Roof v. Wiley
  622 So. 2d 1018· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-06-18 ·cited 10×
  Carrie Linn Young Roof sued her grandfather Calvin Wiley for sexual abuse occurring in 1973, along with other family members for related intentional torts. The trial court dismissed the complaint as time-barred under the four-year statute of limitations, but while the appeal was
• Rosetta Slater Jackson and Frank Steven Davis v. State
  619 So. 2d 431· Fla. 1st DCA· 1993-06-04 ·cited 10×·via Retroactivity Of Statutory Amendments
• Gray v. First Winthrop Corp.
  989 F.2d 1564· 9th Cir.· 1993-04-07 ·cited 10×·via Retroactive Legislation
  Section 27A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is constitutional, as it changes the underlying substantive law and does not violate separation of powers, finality principles, or due process/equal protection guarantees.
• Butts v. The City OF NEW York Dep't OF Hous. Pres. & Dev.
  990 F.2d 1397· 2d Cir.· 1993-03-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Civil Rights Act of 1991 does not apply retroactively to Plaintiff's § 1981 claims, but reversed dismissal of timely § 1981 promotion claims and two Title VII claims.
• Hicks v. Brown Grp., Inc.
  982 F.2d 295· 8th Cir.· 1992-12-30 ·cited 10×
  The Civil Rights Act of 1991 does not apply retroactively to cases pending at the time of its enactment, and therefore does not revive claims that were no longer actionable under prior Supreme Court precedent.
• Toschlog v. State
  604 So. 2d 22· Fla. 2d DCA· 1992-08-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying the appellant's motion to correct his sentence because there was no record support for the forfeiture of gain time and the relevant statutory amendment was not retroactive.
• Davis v. United States
  972 F.2d 227· 8th Cir.· 1992-08-06 ·cited 10×
• United States v. McGLORY
  968 F.2d 309· 3d Cir.· 1992-06-19 ·cited 10×
  The court affirmed the convictions and sentence, but the concurring opinion questions the sufficiency of coded conversations as evidence and analyzes the ambiguity in sentencing under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A).
• John W. Delk, D.D.S. v. Dep't of Prof'l Reg.
  595 So. 2d 966· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-01-24 ·cited 10×
  Dr. John Delk appealed disciplinary sanctions imposed by the Florida Department of Professional Regulation for alleged violations of dental practice statutes. The court reversed the disciplinary findings because the dentist was charged and tried under 1986 statutes for conduct th
• United States v. Brebner
  951 F.2d 1017· 9th Cir.· 1991-12-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the 1986 statutory amendment regarding expunged convictions does not apply retroactively to offenses committed prior to its effective date, and that the defendant failed to present sufficient evidence for an entrapment by estoppel defense.
• Applestein v. Gustave Simons & Nat'l Sur. Corp.
  586 So. 2d 441· Fla. 3d DCA· 1991-09-17 ·cited 10×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's decision regarding the interest rate on a judgment. The court found that statutory increases in the interest rate did not apply retroactively to the judgment entered before the increases took effect.
• Bakst v. Marks (In Re Marks)
  131 B.R. 220· S.D. Fla.· 1991-08-29 ·cited 10×
  The court held that Florida Statute § 222.21(2)(a) could not be applied retroactively to exempt assets that creditors had a vested interest in prior to the statute's effective date.
• Nassau Square Assocs., Ltd. v. Ins. Comm'r OF the State OF Cal.
  579 So. 2d 259· Fla. 4th DCA· 1991-05-01 ·cited 10×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's determination that section 697.07, Florida Statutes (1987), governing assignments of rents in mortgages, should be applied retroactively to assignments executed before the statute's effective date. The court held that
• United States v. Telink
  910 F.2d 598· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the indictment was properly dismissed because it alleged a scheme to defraud the county of intangible rights, which is not covered by the mail fraud statute as interpreted by McNally, and the subsequent statutory amendment is not retroactive.
• Kelly v. State
  546 So. 2d 441· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-07-05 ·cited 10×
  A defendant cannot be convicted of both robbery and grand theft for a single underlying act, and a new statute cannot be applied retroactively to the defendant's disadvantage.
• Dale v. Haeberlin
  878 F.2d 930· 6th Cir.· 1989-07-03 ·cited 10×
  The court holds that the grant of habeas relief should be reversed because there was no denial of due process, despite the enhancement of Dale's punishment.
• ABT v. State
  541 So. 2d 614· Fla.· 1989-04-13 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the portion of Chapter 87-110, Laws of Florida, amending section 921.001(5), Florida Statutes, is not applicable to appellate review of sentences for offenses committed prior to July 1, 1987.
• Spadaro v. State
  539 So. 2d 1169· Fla. 2d DCA· 1989-03-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court erred in summarily denying the defendant's double jeopardy claim, and that the Carawan decision is retroactively applicable.
• Bonjorno v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Corp. & Kaiser Aluminum & Chem. Sales, Inc.
  865 F.2d 566· 3d Cir.· 1989-01-09 ·cited 10×
  The court should not apply the 1982 amendment to 28 U.S.C. § 1961 to cases where judgment was entered before its effective date, regardless of pending appeals.
• Sulie v. Duckworth
  864 F.2d 1348· 7th Cir.· 1988-12-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that while the district court erred in applying Kuhlmann's strict factual innocence requirement, the alleged constitutional error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.
• Meadows v. State
  534 So. 2d 1233· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-12-14 ·cited 10×
  Dual convictions for armed robbery and aggravated assault arising from a single act are impermissible, and the legislature's amendment to the relevant statute should not be applied retroactively.
• Am. Ass'n OF Christian Schs. Voluntary Emps. Beneficiary Ass'n Welf. Plan Tr. v. United States
  850 F.2d 1510· 11th Cir.· 1988-08-02 ·cited 10×
  The Trust does not qualify for tax-exempt status under 26 U.S.C.A. §§ 501(c)(3), (4), or (9) because it operates as a commercial insurance provider with substantial private, non-exempt purposes and fails to meet control and nondiscrimination requirements for VEBAs.
• Landi v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co.
  529 So. 2d 1170· Fla. 2d DCA· 1988-07-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that plaintiffs were not entitled to uninsured motorist coverage equal to their bodily injury coverage, as their failure to act on periodic notices bound them to the policy's stated limits.
• Dir., Off. of Workers' Comp. Programs, United States Dep't of Labor v. Detroit Harbor Terminals, Inc.
  850 F.2d 283· 6th Cir.· 1988-06-24 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the death benefits awarded to the widow were not an 'adjustment' under Section 10(h)(1) of the Act because the death occurred long after the statutory deadline for such adjustments.
• Peterson v. Shearson/American Express, Inc.
  849 F.2d 464· 10th Cir.· 1988-06-09 ·cited 10×
  Shearson waived its right to arbitrate the state law claims by substantially invoking the litigation process, but retained its right to arbitrate the federal securities claim due to the unsettled state of the law prior to McMahon.
• Nat'l Ins. Underwriters v. Cessna Aircraft Corp.
  522 So. 2d 53· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-02-11 ·cited 10×·via Retrospective Application
  A products liability statute of repose, though retroactively applicable under Pullum v. Cincinnati, should not be applied against plaintiffs who justifiably relied on the prior Battilla decision declaring the statute unconstitutional and filed suit within the normal four-year sta
• Leonel Campos v. State
  515 So. 2d 1358· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-12-02 ·cited 10×·via Retroactivity Of Statutory Amendments
  Leonel Campos appeals his resentencing for robbery with a firearm and shooting at an occupied vehicle following a bank robbery, high-speed chase, and shots fired at police. The Fourth District Court of Appeal reverses and remands because the trial court relied on one invalid reas
• Patterson v. State
  513 So. 2d 1263· Fla.· 1987-10-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that sentencing guideline amendments are not purely procedural and their retrospective application can violate the ex post facto clause.
• Clausell v. Hobart Corp.
  506 So. 2d 1160· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-05-12 ·cited 10×
• Jackson v. Franklin Cnty. Sch. Bd.
  806 F.2d 623· 5th Cir.· 1986-12-24 ·cited 10×·via Retroactivity Of Statutory Amendments
  The court held that the school district violated James Jackson's due process rights and the Education for All Handicapped Children Act (EHA) by failing to provide proper notice and a hearing before excluding him from school.
• Tackett v. Benefits Review Bd.
  806 F.2d 640· 6th Cir.· 1986-10-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Board erred in applying its later decision in Hunter, and that the claimant should have the opportunity to prove her husband's lung cancer was a chronic lung disease to invoke the statutory presumption.
• Ridgway v. Wapello Cnty.
  795 F.2d 646· 8th Cir.· 1986-07-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Wilson v. Garcia should not be applied retroactively to bar the plaintiff's § 1983 action.
• City OF Farmington v. Amoco GAS Co.
  777 F.2d 554· 10th Cir.· 1985-11-12 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court's interpretation of the contract's indefinite price escalator clause, in light of regulatory changes, was not clearly erroneous, and its award of prejudgment interest was not an abuse of discretion.
• CPI Crude v. Coffman
  776 F.2d 1546· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1985-10-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court correctly applied the two-year Texas statute of limitations to the federal overcharge claims, finding that the cause of action accrued at the time of the first overcharge and that the plaintiff failed to establish fraudulent concealment.
• Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Gibbs
  773 F.2d 15· 1st Cir.· 1985-09-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the reinsurance contract's claims cooperation clause required notice of any loss with a reasonable possibility of reaching reinsurance limits, and that the statutory amendment regarding lack of prejudice applied prospectively, not retroactively.
• Edwards v. Heckler
  770 F.2d 1496· 9th Cir.· 1985-09-13 ·cited 10×
  The court should uphold the district court's award of attorneys' fees because the plaintiff was a prevailing party and the Secretary's position was not substantially justified.
• Black v. Nesmith
  475 So. 2d 963· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-09-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a prior judicial decision, which found the statute limiting paternity actions to unmarried women unconstitutional, operates retrospectively and applies even if the child was born when the statute was in effect.
• Beggs v. State
  473 So. 2d 9· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-07-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the sentencing guidelines in effect at the time of the crime, not a later revised version, must be used for sentencing.
• Roy v. Creasy
  763 F.2d 656· 4th Cir.· 1985-06-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a bankruptcy removal petition is timely if any defendant meets the thirty-day removal requirement, and that district courts have jurisdiction over bankruptcy matters, including pension fund disputes, under the 1984 Act.
• Mott v. State
  469 So. 2d 946· Fla. 5th DCA· 1985-05-30 ·cited 10×
  A sentence imposed under an amended sentencing guideline, effective after the offense date, violates the ex post facto doctrine.
• Stanley Frankowitz, D.O. v. Propst
  464 So. 2d 1225· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-01-09 ·cited 10×
  Medical doctors challenged the constitutionality of Florida's medical malpractice attorney's fees statute (Section 768.56) after a jury found them negligent and awarded fees to the prevailing plaintiff. The Fourth District Court of Appeal upheld the statute, holding that it appli
• Moore v. Zant
  734 F.2d 585· 11th Cir.· 1984-06-04 ·cited 10×
• Petrou Fisheries, Inc. v. Interstate Commerce Comm'n & the United States
  727 F.2d 542· 5th Cir.· 1984-03-23 ·cited 10×
  The market dominance requirement of the Railroad Revitalization and Regulatory Reform Act of 1976 (4R Act) should not be applied retroactively to proceedings commenced before its enactment.
• Bullard v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  708 F.2d 1020· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-05 ·cited 10×
  The court vacated the district court's grant of habeas relief and remanded with instructions to dismiss the case with prejudice due to lack of a live case or controversy.
• Gourley v. State
  432 So. 2d 755· Fla. 5th DCA· 1983-06-09 ·cited 10×
• In re Gifford
  688 F.2d 447· 7th Cir.· 1982-08-18 ·cited 10×
  The court held that 11 U.S.C. § 522(f) applies to pre-enactment security interests and its application does not violate the Fifth Amendment's due process or taking clauses.