Retroactive Application Of Statutes

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

• COX v. Wyrick
  873 F.2d 200· 8th Cir.· 1989-04-26
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying a motion for reconsideration of a habeas corpus petition denial, as the new rule cited was inapposite and the prior decision was the law of the case.
• Cassidy v. Buddy Adams
  872 F.2d 729· 6th Cir.· 1989-04-11
  The court held that the extended statute of limitations applied retroactively, extinguishing any vested property right in the overpayments. The dissent argues this ignores the distinction between limitations affecting a right and those affecting a remedy.
• Junior Salesmen OF Fla., Inc. v. Bogeajis
  541 So. 2d 676· Fla. 5th DCA· 1989-03-16
  The court held that the independent contractor was not an agent and therefore not covered by the non-compete statute, even if the statute was retroactively applied.
• Krebs v. State
  534 So. 2d 1236· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-12-15
  The court held that the 1987 statute regarding multiple departure reasons for sentencing guidelines does not apply retroactively to offenses committed in 1981.
• Jolly v. State
  536 So. 2d 1086· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-11-16
  Eric Jolly appealed his sentencing after the trial court resentenced him following a prior appellate decision correcting his sentencing guidelines scoresheet. The court held that the resentencing improperly resulted in a total sentence exceeding the guidelines range without writt
• Marion Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Evon Denise Streetman
  535 So. 2d 299· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-11-10
• State v. Bowen
  533 So. 2d 851· Fla. 5th DCA· 1988-10-20
  The court held that the trial court erred in departing downward from the sentencing guidelines by retroactively applying a statutory amendment that took effect after the offense occurred.
• Netsky v. United States
  859 F.2d 1· 3d Cir.· 1988-10-12
  The court held that it has jurisdiction to hear the appeal because the district court's decision did not squarely hold an Act of Congress unconstitutional, thus a direct appeal to the Supreme Court was not available under 28 U.S.C. § 1252.
• Clay v. Lynaugh
  849 F.2d 908· 5th Cir.· 1988-06-30
  The court is certifying a question to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals regarding whether the Texas carving doctrine, if still in effect, would have barred the petitioner's conviction for aggravated rape.
• Reynolds v. Heartland Transp.
  849 F.2d 1074· 8th Cir.· 1988-06-14
  The court held that the three-year statute of limitations for maritime torts, 46 U.S.C.App. § 763a, and the doctrine of laches barred the seaman's suit for injuries sustained before the statute's enactment, as he had a reasonable opportunity to sue after its passage.
• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Skeeters
  846 F.2d 932· 4th Cir.· 1988-05-05
  The court held that the settlement agreement violated Allstate's subrogation rights under the insurance policy, and the subsequent statutory amendment disallowing subrogation did not apply retroactively to void these pre-existing contractual rights.
• Dominguez v. Bucyrus-Erie Co.
  520 So. 2d 268· Fla.· 1988-02-18
  The Florida Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of a product liability action brought by Juan Dominguez for injuries sustained more than twelve years after machinery delivery, holding that the 1983 legislative abolishment of the statute of repose did not apply retrospectively to c
• United States v. VAN Horn
  836 F.2d 1235· 9th Cir.· 1988-01-14
  The court held that the 1981 amendments to the Lacey Act, which require a felony conviction for forfeiture, do not apply retroactively to offenses committed before their enactment.
• Desvergundt v. Koppers Co., Inc.
  517 So. 2d 683· Fla.· 1988-01-07
• AAA Guaranteed Mortg., Inc. v. State
  517 So. 2d 761· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-12-30
  The court held that the statute authorizing fines could not be applied retroactively to conduct that occurred before its effective date.
• Wells v. Michaud
  516 So. 2d 1066· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-12-16
  The court reversed a trial court's dismissal of a personal injury claim, holding that the dismissal was improper on both grounds cited: failure to timely prosecute and failure to serve an indispensable party.
• Bowers v. The Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
  832 F.2d 64· 5th Cir.· 1987-11-12
  The court held that by settling with two codefendants, the plaintiffs relinquished their right to claim prejudgment interest on the portion of the judgment attributable to those settling defendants, and the remaining defendant was only liable for prejudgment interest on its propo
• Young v. Biggers
  826 F.2d 1399· 5th Cir.· 1987-08-26
  The court denied petitions for rehearing and suggested that the trial court may dismiss certain defendants on limitations or immunity grounds upon remand.
• Braziel v. Stokes Automatic Molding Equipment
  510 So. 2d 1065· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-07-29
  The Fourth District affirmed the trial court's denial of summary judgment in a product liability case and certified questions to the Florida Supreme Court regarding the retroactive application of the 1983 amendment abolishing the statute of repose under Florida Statutes § 95.031(
• Young v. State
  509 So. 2d 1339· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-07-21
  The court held that a jury instruction on excusable homicide, which verbatim recited the statute including language about dangerous weapons, was misleading and reversible error when the facts did not support its exclusion. Additionally, imposing community control for a misdemeano
• Viviene W. Makowiecki v. Sturm
  510 So. 2d 345· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-07-17
  A plaintiff injured by an allegedly defective gun appeals a summary judgment based on Florida's statute of repose, which bars products liability actions more than twelve years after delivery to the original purchaser. The court affirms the summary judgment, holding the statute of
• Howard v. State
  508 So. 2d 42· Fla. 4th DCA· 1987-06-10
  A youthful offender convicted of armed robbery and aggravated assault challenges the revocation of his community control status, arguing that applying an amended 1985 statute to his conduct violates the ex post facto prohibition. The court affirms, holding that the amended statut
• Ricardo v. State
  504 So. 2d 539· Fla. 1st DCA· 1987-04-01
• Paige v. Fla. Dep't OF Transp. & Hubbard Constr. Co.
  502 So. 2d 96· Fla. 5th DCA· 1987-02-12
  The court held that the statute of repose was unconstitutional when the cause of action accrued and that its subsequent reenactment did not apply retroactively to bar the claim.
• Dominguez v. Bucyrus-Erie Co.
  503 So. 2d 364· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-02-11
• Saadia L. Bibbs v. State
  500 So. 2d 660· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-12-31
  The court held that applying section 27.3455, Florida Statutes, to crimes committed before its enactment is an impermissible retroactive application of law.
• Folta v. Joseph Bolton, M.D.
  806 F.2d 994· 11th Cir.· 1986-12-22
  The court held that attorney's fees under Fla.Stat. § 768.56 are improper for causes of action that accrued prior to July 1, 1980, and the district court's denial of such fees was correct.
• Bailie v. State
  498 So. 2d 602· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-12-03
  Russell Bailie was convicted of two counts of marijuana sale and sentenced to eight and one-half years in prison plus various costs. On appeal, the court found the trial judge erred by denying Bailie the opportunity to elect sentencing under the guidelines and by imposing court c
• Gordon v. State
  501 So. 2d 10· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-11-26
  The court affirmed the sentence regarding credit for time served but reversed the portion requiring community service in lieu of costs for an indigent defendant.
• Frank Hellinger, M.D. v. Fike
  503 So. 2d 905· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-11-06
  This medical malpractice case addresses whether a statute of repose bars a claim arising from a 1972 misdiagnosis. The court held that statutes of repose are presumed non-retroactive, and therefore the applicable statute of limitations is the pre-repose version that ran from disc
• Bd. OF Trs. OF the Internal Improvement Fund v. Stevens
  495 So. 2d 167· Fla.· 1986-10-02
  This case involves a concurring opinion that critiques the majority's practice of denying jurisdiction in certiorari cases without explanation, arguing it leads to confusion and unnecessary appeals.
• Cheryl Hargett ad litem for Nathaniel Hargett v. David Limberg, M.D.
  801 F.2d 368· 10th Cir.· 1986-09-18
  The court held that the prior Utah Supreme Court ruling tolling statutes of limitations for minors applied to this medical malpractice claim, and the saving clause of the amended statute allowed the claim to be filed within four years of the amendment's effective date.
• State v. Moore
  489 So. 2d 1130· Fla.· 1986-06-26
• Dale Baker Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Fiat Motors OF N. Am., Inc.
  794 F.2d 213· 6th Cir.· 1986-06-23
  The court held that the 1981 Motor Vehicle Act, specifically section 11, could not be applied retrospectively to a dealer agreement executed before its effective date because it created new obligations and substantive rights, impairing vested contractual rights.
• Chenard v. State
  486 So. 2d 689· Fla. 3d DCA· 1986-04-15
  Trial court's departure from sentencing guidelines without a written statement of reasons violates Florida law and requires resentencing, even though oral explanation was given at sentencing.
• Priest v. State
  483 So. 2d 900· Fla. 1st DCA· 1986-03-07
  The court held that the trial court erred in denying the motion to correct sentence, as the appellant was entitled to credit for time served under a split sentence imposed prior to a statutory amendment.
• Robinson v. State
  484 So. 2d 60· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-02-28
  The court held that minimum mandatory sentences stemming from a single criminal episode cannot be imposed consecutively.
• United States v. Brandon
  781 F.2d 1051· 4th Cir.· 1986-01-24
  The court held that 38 U.S.C. § 1780(a)(4) provides a right of recovery for educational benefits paid to veterans who do not pass their courses, and recovery does not violate due process.
• Ctr. Bev. Co., Inc. v. Miller Brewing Co.
  779 F.2d 168· 3d Cir.· 1985-12-19
  The court held that the 1980 amendment to the Pennsylvania Liquor Code requiring 'good cause' for termination does not apply retroactively to distributorship agreements entered into before its effective date.
• Dep't OF Revenue v. Naranja Lakes Condo. Ass'ns Nos. One
  480 So. 2d 175· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-12-17
  The court held that the Department of Revenue is entitled to collect back sales rental taxes for a 3-year period, reversing the trial court's denial of this right.
• Schwabenbauer v. Bd. OF Educ. OF the City Sch. Dist. OF the City OF Olean
  777 F.2d 837· 2d Cir.· 1985-11-22
  The court held that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended in 1972, does not apply retroactively to the school board's actions in 1970 regarding maternity leave credit, and therefore, the plaintiff's claim of sex discrimination was not actionable under Title VII.
• Baker v. State
  480 So. 2d 659· Fla. 5th DCA· 1985-11-21
  The court held that a grant of immunity prohibits the use of immunized statements in subsequent prosecution for perjury, and that the sentencing guidelines must be strictly adhered to.
• Capitol Bank & Tr. OF Chicago v. Fascetta
  771 F.2d 1077· 7th Cir.· 1985-08-29
  The court held that the land trust arrangement created a personal property security interest, not an equitable mortgage, and thus homestead rights were not preserved under the pre-1982 Illinois statute.
• Smith v. United Parcel Serv., Inc.
  776 F.2d 99· 4th Cir.· 1985-08-26
  The court held that the six-month limitations period established in DelCostello v. International Brotherhood of Teamsters applies to suits alleging employer breach of a collective bargaining agreement and union breach of its duty of fair representation.
• Klase v. Wendy's OLD Fashioned Hamburgers & Nationwide Ins. Co.
  466 So. 2d 441· Fla. 1st DCA· 1985-04-09
  The Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed a workers' compensation order that denied minimum disability compensation under Section 440.12(2) by retroactively applying a 1983 amendment. The court held that the amendment is substantive law, not procedural, and therefore ap
• Morgan v. Kemper Ins. Cos.
  754 F.2d 145· 4th Cir.· 1985-02-06
  The court held that an insurance agent has a cause of action against an insurer for wrongful termination, even if insurance was not directly placed with that specific insurer, when the insurer is part of a closely related group that collectively penalizes the agent.
• Venning White v. Distribs. Ass'n Warehousemen's Pension Tr.
  751 F.2d 1040· 9th Cir.· 1985-01-15
  The court held that while the district court properly granted summary judgment on the fiduciary duty and age discrimination claims, it erred in denying leave to amend the complaint to add a claim for violations of ERISA's disclosure requirements.
• Deutsch v. Health Ins. Plan OF Greater NEW York
  751 F.2d 59· 2d Cir.· 1984-12-11
  The court held that HIP's failure to provide formal notice of non-renewal, despite Dr. Deutsch's knowledge of HIP's partial breach, did not negate the contract's automatic renewal, and that Dr. Deutsch could recover lost profits for his partnerships as consequential damages.
• Rogers v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.
  599 F. Supp. 676· S.D. Fla.· 1984-12-03
  The court held that the third-party complaint must be dismissed because the alleged wrongful acts occurred before the effective date of Florida's Long Arm Statute, and the plaintiff failed to allege sufficient control over distributors under the alternative statute.
• Mann v. Fritz K. Grolock
  454 So. 2d 75· Fla. 1st DCA· 1984-08-16
  This case involves appeals from orders dismissing tort claims against the Department of Professional Regulation (DPR) and its attorney, Frederick Wilsen. The court affirmed the dismissal and summary judgment, finding Wilsen was protected by prosecutorial immunity.