Retroactive Application Of Statutes

2,388 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count

• Saadi v. Maroun
  11th Cir.· 2025-10-27
  The court certified several questions of Florida law to the Florida Supreme Court regarding the availability of remedies under Florida Statute § 56.29 and the application of its amendments, as state appellate courts have reached conflicting conclusions.
• Sanchez v. Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co.
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2025-10-22
  A three-judge panel of a district court of appeal is bound by prior panel precedent on identical points of law and cannot overrule such precedent absent authorization by the Constitution or governing rules.
• Wilson v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-10-22
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review.
• Kindle v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-10-15
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review.
• Wilson v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-10-15
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final when the decision was rendered.
• Hector v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-10-15
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to postconviction relief claims.
• Harrell v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-10-15
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct appeal.
• Diaz v. State
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2025-10-08
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final when the decision was rendered.
• Eleuterio Ortiz Olivo v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-09-24
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review.
• Robinson v. State
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2025-09-24
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final when the decision was rendered.
• Myers v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-09-24
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final when the decision was rendered.
• Secrist v. Secrist
  421 So. 3d 781· Fla. 5th DCA· 2025-09-22
  A divorce petition remains pending under the alimony statute until the trial court enters final judgment, and the amended alimony statute applies to petitions pending on or after July 1, 2023. Premarital contributions to a retirement plan are not marital assets subject to equitab
• Flood v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-09-17
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct appeal.
• Ricci Lorenzo Mobley v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-09-17
  Even if Erlinger v. United States constitutes a change of law, it does not apply retroactively to cases on direct appeal.
• Kendrick Stafford v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-09-10
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct appeal.
• Hope v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-09-10
  A change in law established by recent Supreme Court precedent does not apply retroactively to postconviction relief claims.
• Ambrose Calvin v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-09-10
  A change in law established by recent Supreme Court precedent does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review.
• Williams v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-09-03
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final when the decision was issued.
• Glover v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-08-27
  A change of law established in Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct appeal.
• Harry Austin *W* v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-08-27
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct appeal.
• Brown v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-08-27
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to convictions that were final before the decision.
• Emory v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-08-27
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final before the decision.
• Barry v. Murray v. State of Fla.
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-08-27
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final when the decision was rendered.
• Butler v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-08-20
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct appeal.
• Raphael Charistil v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-08-20
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final when the decision was issued.
• Lemuel Ware v. State
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2025-08-20
  Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final when decided and does not support vacating sentences in postconviction proceedings.
• Smith v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-08-13
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct appeal.
• Willingham v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-07-16
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final before the decision was rendered.
• Wright v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-07-16
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final when the decision was issued.
• Marcel Thomas v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-07-16
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct appeal.
• Trahn Bowens v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-07-09
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct appeal.
• Hartman v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-07-02
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct appeal.
• Toric Yearby v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-07-02
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct appeal.
• Ingram v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-07-02
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final when the decision was rendered.
• Freeman v. State
  Fla. 5th DCA· 2025-07-01
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases on collateral review.
• Marsel Peterson v. State
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2025-06-25
  A change in law established by Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases that were final when the decision was rendered.
• Booth v. State
  Fla. 5th DCA· 2025-06-24
  Even if Erlinger v. United States constitutes a change of law, it does not apply retroactively.
• Chambers v. Progressive Select Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-06-12
  The court held that the insurance company's timely tender of policy limits and demanded amounts barred the bad faith claim under Florida Statute § 624.155(4)(a), as the statute applies prospectively to the date the cause of action accrued.
• OE Alloy Paris, LLC v. City of Tampa & JC Hudgison
  13th Cir. Ct. App. Div.· 2025-04-11
  OE Alloy Paris, LLC sought a writ of mandamus to compel the City of Tampa to issue certificates of occupancy for two single-family homes with 15-foot build-to-line setbacks. The court denied the petition, finding that the Building Official has discretionary authority to withhold
• Stockdale v. Stockdale
  409 So. 3d 163· Fla. 1st DCA· 2025-04-09
  A petition for dissolution of marriage remains pending under section 61.08(11), Florida Statutes (2023), until the circuit court renders a final judgment, and the 2023 amendments eliminating permanent alimony apply to petitions still pending on July 1, 2023, even if a magistrate
• Cont'l Gen. Ins. Co. v. Gardina
  M.D. Fla.· 2025-03-27
  The court held that the incontestability statute did not apply retroactively and that the plaintiff's fraud claims were not barred by Florida's independent tort rule because the alleged fraud was not inextricably intertwined with the contract's performance.
• Vo v. Scottsdale Ins. Co.
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2025-02-26
  Section 624.1551, enacted in May 2022, cannot be applied retroactively to bar an extracontractual damages claim that vested before the statute's enactment, as retroactive application would impair a vested right and attach new legal consequences to completed events.
• McCune v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-12-12
  The court held that the petitioner's claims regarding the sufficiency of charging informations, the retroactivity of a statutory amendment, and double jeopardy were meritless or not cognizable on federal habeas review.
• Isaacson v. QBE Specialty Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-10-22
  A bad-faith insurance claim under Fla. Stat. § 624.1551 cannot be brought until the insured has obtained an adverse adjudication by a court that the insurer breached the policy, and the payment of an appraisal award does not satisfy this requirement.
• Kanter v. Healy
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-27
  The district court affirmed the bankruptcy court's approval of a settlement, finding no abuse of discretion in applying the Justice Oaks factors.
• Wright v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Polk)
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-18
  Federal habeas relief is denied because the petitioner's claims are either not cognizable in federal court as they involve state law issues or fail to demonstrate that the state court's adjudication was contrary to or an unreasonable application of federal law.
• Rivera v. United States
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-09-16
  The court held that the petitioner's claims were procedurally barred, lacked merit, and were untimely, denying relief on all grounds.
• Nery Villar v. Scottsdale Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-08-15
  The court held that while there was an intervening change in law regarding the retroactivity of Fla. Stat. § 627.70152, reconsideration was not warranted because the judgment had been executed and the motion was untimely.
• Farrell v. State
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-04-25
  The court held that federal habeas review cannot grant relief for state law errors, and to the extent federal claims were raised, they were meritless.
• Book v. Palm Beach Cnty. Comm'n on Ethics
  15th Cir. Ct. App. Div.· 2024-04-18
  Ronald Book challenges a Palm Beach County Commission on Ethics final order finding an ethics violation, arguing that a June 2024 amendment to Florida Statutes § 112.326 retroactively invalidated the Commission's authority to initiate self-initiated complaints. The court granted