Strict Construction Of Statutes In Derogation Of Common Law

86 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• The Fla. Nat'l Bank AT Gainesville v. Alfred & ANN Goldstein Found., Inc.
  327 So. 2d 110· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-02-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Florida Statutes § 675.115 and § 672.710 do not provide a basis for awarding attorneys' fees in this case.
• Rosamond Strickland v. Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co.
  194 So. 2d 69· Fla. 1st DCA· 1967-01-19 ·cited 4×
  A husband's negligence or gross negligence causing his wife's death does not forfeit his priority right of action under the Wrongful Death Act, thus precluding his stepchildren from suing him.
• Colvin v. Clements & Ashmore, P.A.
  182 So. 3d 924· Fla. 1st DCA· 2016-01-15 ·cited 3×
  In this medical malpractice appeal, the court addressed whether a settlement proposal that failed to explicitly state whether attorney's fees and punitive damages were included must be strictly construed under Florida law, even when doing so produces an absurd result. The First D
• Hoang Dinh Duong, M.D., Radiology Assocs. of Hollywood, P.A. v. Ziadie
  153 So. 3d 354· Fla. 4th DCA· 2014-12-17 ·cited 3×
  In a medical malpractice case, the court upheld a proposal for settlement made by a single plaintiff (acting as guardian) to a single defendant that allocated settlement amounts among multiple claimants. The court rejected the defendant's challenge that the proposal was ambiguous
• ST. Vincent's Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Robert and Tammy Bennett
  27 So. 3d 65· Fla. 1st DCA· 2009-08-21 ·cited 3×
  The Florida appellate court reversed an administrative law judge's decision denying NICA coverage for a child's cerebral palsy, holding that the ALJ erred by failing to apply a statutory rebuttable presumption of compensability when the claimant established the child suffered a p
• Stevens v. Fla. Peninsula Ins. Co.
  423 So. 3d 459· Fla. 2d DCA· 2025-08-29 ·cited 2×
  Proposals for settlement that comply with the statutory and rule requirements in effect at the time they are served remain valid and enforceable even if subsequently amended rules would have prohibited their terms. The inclusion of a general release in a proposal for settlement d
• Ehlert v. Castro
  330 So. 3d 41· Fla. 4th DCA· 2021-11-03 ·cited 2×
  Andrea Ehlert sought attorney's fees under Florida's offer of settlement statute after obtaining a judgment exceeding her $100,000 settlement proposal by more than 25%. The trial court denied the motion, finding the proposal ambiguous regarding the scope of claims covered. The ap
• Mc Liberty Express v. All Points Servs.
  252 So. 3d 397· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-08-08 ·cited 2×
  A trial court must make explicit findings that a claim or defense is frivolous and completely untenable before awarding attorney's fees under section 57.105, and such fees must be apportioned in equal amounts between the losing party and the losing party's attorney as the statute
• GOLISTING.COM, Inc. v. Papera
  229 So. 3d 862· Fla. 4th DCA· 2017-10-11 ·cited 2×
  A real estate company (PBPRE) prevailed at trial against homeowners (the Paperas) in a commission dispute and sought attorney's fees based on the Paperas' rejection of a settlement proposal. The court affirmed the denial of summary judgment but reversed the denial of attorney's f
• UCF Athletics Ass'n Inc. v. Enock Plancher
  121 So. 3d 616· Fla. 5th DCA· 2013-08-16 ·cited 2×
  A plaintiff is not entitled to attorney's fees under the offer of judgment statute when the net judgment obtained is less than 25% more than the offer, especially when sovereign immunity limits the judgment amount.
• Nowak v. Lexington Ins.
  464 F. Supp. 2d 1248· S.D. Fla.· 2006-05-26 ·cited 2×
  The court held that a plaintiff cannot maintain a separate cause of action under Florida Statute § 626.9541(1)(i) if they fail to provide specific notice of that alleged violation in their Civil Remedy Notice, as required by Florida Statute § 624.155(3).
• Hallacker v. Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. OF Gloucester Cnty.
  806 F.2d 488· 3d Cir.· 1986-12-04 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the consideration clause of the Landowners' Liability Act applies even if the plaintiff did not directly pay the consideration, thus potentially removing the landowner's immunity.
• Coons v. Lawlor
  804 F.2d 28· 3d Cir.· 1986-10-15 ·cited 2×
  An owner-passenger is not considered a 'guest' under Indiana's guest statute, and thus is not barred from recovering for simple negligence.
• In re Adoption OF Robert Charles Scott
  344 So. 2d 884· Fla. 1st DCA· 1977-03-24 ·cited 2×
  A prospective adoptive father appealed the dismissal of his petition to adopt an adult for failure to prosecute with diligence. The court affirmed the dismissal, holding that because the petition failed to comply with statutory requirements for notice to or consent from the natur
• Graham v. Colon
  393 F.2d 166· 7th Cir.· 1968-04-03 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the trial court erred in submitting the guest vs. passenger question to the jury and in giving contributory negligence instructions.
• W. Pa. Nat'l Bank v. Ross
  345 F.2d 525· 6th Cir.· 1965-05-06 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the County Commissioners were not amenable to a wrongful death action because the alleged negligence did not fall under the statutory exception to sovereign immunity for failure to keep roads in repair.
• Pheiffer v. Pa. R. Co.
  186 F.2d 558· 6th Cir.· 1951-01-31 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the decedent was a passenger for hire, not a guest, because he was being transported as part of a work exchange agreement where the third party hired the driver, thus the guest statute did not apply.
• Manuel Diaz Farms, Inc. v. Delgado
  193 So. 3d 71· Fla. 3d DCA· 2016-05-11 ·cited 1×
  The court held that a defendant's amendment to its affirmative defenses does not moot a valid settlement proposal, and the proposal's lack of specific release terms does not render it ambiguous.
• Action Labor OF Fla., Inc. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.
  879 So. 2d 1240· Fla. 3d DCA· 2004-04-14 ·cited 1×
  A temporary help firm that assigns its own employees to supplement a contractor's workforce does not qualify as a 'subcontractor' under the 1998 version of Florida Statute § 713.01(26) and therefore cannot assert a lien on a construction payment bond. Although the legislature ame
• Dearing v. Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp.
  758 So. 2d 1236· Fla. 5th DCA· 2000-05-26 ·cited 1×
  Dearing sued GMAC, the lessor of a vehicle involved in an accident, under the dangerous instrumentality doctrine. The court reversed summary judgment for GMAC, holding that the lease did not strictly comply with the statutory exemption for leases of one year or longer because it
• Miami Nat'l Bank v. Realty Equities Corp. of N.Y.
  35 Fla. Supp. 178· Dade Cty. Cir. Ct.· 1971-06-09 ·cited 1×
  Service of process on the defendant was insufficient because it was mailed rather than personally served on the Secretary of State as required by statute.
• Storey Mountain v. Del Amo
  11th Cir.· 2025-11-10
  The Eleventh Circuit held that the 2008 amendment to Florida Statute § 655.79(1) did not abrogate the Florida Supreme Court's holding in Beal Bank, which requires an express disclaimer on the signature card to negate a tenancy by the entirety for a married couple's bank account.
• Progressive Am. Ins. Co. v. Gonzalez
  Fla. 3d DCA· 2025-03-19
  Under section 624.155(3)(a), Florida Statutes (2018), the insured must give actual written notice to the insurer 60 days before filing a bad faith action; filing notice with the Department does not constitute notice to the insurer, and insurers cannot be required to monitor the D
• Sully v. Scottsdale Ins. Co.
  S.D. Fla.· 2024-04-29
  The court affirmed the magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss the complaint, holding that the plaintiffs' Civil Remedy Notice (CRN) failed to meet the specificity requirements of Florida Statute § 624.155(3)(b).
• Borrego v. GeoVera Specialty Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2024-02-12
  The court held that the defendant's motion for attorney's fees and costs is subject to further briefing due to a discrepancy in the offer of judgment's acceptance period.
• Hunt v. Lightfoot
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2023-01-03
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's award of attorney's fees to a plaintiff, finding that the plaintiff's "proposal for settlement" was not made in good faith. The court held that requiring $1.3 million in cash within thirty days to settle was an illusory condition, maki
• Demase v. State Farm Fla. Ins. Co.
  Fla. 5th DCA· 2022-11-14
  A civil remedy notice must comply strictly with the specificity requirements of § 624.155(3)(b), which mandates that the notice identify the specific statutory language allegedly violated and reference specific policy language relevant to the violation; substantial compliance is
• Acheron Portfolio Tr. v. Mukamal
  S.D. Fla.· 2022-10-05
  The court affirmed the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying the Trustee's motion for fees.
• Vintage Bay Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. Lexington Ins. Co.
  M.D. Fla.· 2022-10-04
  The court held that the defendant's motion to dismiss the bad faith claims was denied because the Civil Remedy Notice was not fatally defective and the bad faith claims were ripe, as liability and damages had been determined through appraisal and notice was properly filed.
• State Farm Auto. Ins. Co. v. Lightfoot
  Fla. 1st DCA· 2022-05-25
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's award of attorney's fees, finding that a proposal for settlement requiring $1.3 million in cash within thirty days was not made in good faith. The court held that such an offer was illusory and impossible to accept, thus contravening t
• Junior Julien v. United Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co.
  Fla. 4th DCA· 2021-03-03
  A civil remedy notice under section 624.155, Florida Statutes, must identify with specificity the particular statutory and policy provisions allegedly violated; listing nearly all policy sections and citing thirty-five statutory provisions fails to meet this requirement and does
• Jacksonville Golfair, Inc. v. Grover
  988 So. 2d 1225· Fla. 1st DCA· 2008-08-21
  The court held that an offer of judgment was clear and unambiguous, entitling the offeror to attorneys' fees under section 768.79, Florida Statutes, despite not settling all claims between all parties.
• Travelers Indem. Co. of Ill. v. Royal Oak Enters., Inc.
  359 F. Supp. 2d 1321· M.D. Fla.· 2005-03-17
  The court held that Royal Oak was not entitled to attorney's fees under Fla. Stat. § 627.428 because the insurance policy was not issued for delivery in Florida, but the court granted Royal Oak's motion for costs.
• Hilyer SOD, Inc. v. Willis Shaw Express, Inc.
  817 So. 2d 1050· Fla. 1st DCA· 2002-06-06
  A joint settlement proposal made by multiple plaintiffs to a single defendant must apportion and specify the amount and terms attributable to each plaintiff under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442(c)(3). An unaporitioned proposal fails to meet the rule's requirements and does
• Spalding v. Spalding
  813 So. 2d 1078· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-04-24
  An income deduction order under section 61.1301, Florida Statutes, cannot be used solely for the payment of attorney's fees.
• Myers v. Pacific Greyhound Lines
  134 F.2d 457· 10th Cir.· 1943-03-05
  The court held that partial dependence, along with substantial contributions, is sufficient to establish dependency under the wrongful death statute, and the evidence presented was enough to go to the jury.