SCOTUSBlog
JANUARY 9, 2022
Prior Supreme Court decisions have made clear that the state is entitled only to the portion of the settlement attributable to medical expenses. The question now is how much of the total settlement Florida can recover. This case will determine how those provisions apply specifically to future medical expenses.
SCOTUSBlog
AUGUST 1, 2023
This week, we highlight cert petitions that ask the court to consider, among other things, whether a prison official is entitled to qualified immunity after he forced an elderly diabetic man into a shower filled with feces and then prevented him from cleaning his open wounds for a week. A federal district court in Florida ruled for Hoxie.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Broadcast Law Blog
SEPTEMBER 1, 2021
Courts in other states had rejected that argument (see our articles on decisions in New York , Florida and Georgia ), but the question of the status of the law remained unresolved in California.
JURIST
JUNE 15, 2023
The court found that the appeal’s court decision in this case, which vacated Smith’s original conviction in the improper venue, “did not adjudicate Smith’s culpability, and thus [did] not trigger the Double Jeopardy Clause.” Federal prosecutors originally indicted Timothy Smith for hacking a Florida company.
JURIST
APRIL 6, 2023
In 2017, the US Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit struck down a Florida law preventing medical professionals from asking patients about firearm ownership. The court stated , “the First Amendment ensures that doctors cannot be threatened with state punishment for speech even if it goes beyond diagnosis and treatment.”
Law 360
MAY 26, 2022
While some view the American Bar Association’s elimination of continuing legal education diversity requirements as capitulating to a Florida Supreme Court decision against the mandate, it was a strategic decision to serve Florida members while improving diversity, equity and inclusion efforts in other ways, says Tiffani Lee at Holland & Knight.
Broadcast Law Blog
JULY 16, 2021
The court looked at other issues in its comprehensive decision, including an argument that the copyright holder waited too long to sue (rejected, as the suit was brought within the 3-year statute of limitations) and arguments that any harm was “de minimis” and did not justify a lawsuit.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
80 
Let's personalize your content