Gould v. Interface, Inc., Case No. 23-12882 (11th Cir. 2025).
A party who advances a different interpretation of a legal instrument on appeal than argued in the trial court forfeits the new argument if the fundamental change in contractual interpretation crosses from permissible argument refinement into impermissible position switch.
Devengoechea v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Case No. 24-10029 (11th Cir. 2025).
The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not permit trial in absentia against civil defendants, including foreign sovereigns, and the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act requires compliance with Rule 55 default judgment procedures when a defendant fails to defend.
City of Gainesville v. Parkwood Alachua Land Investments, Inc., Case No. 1D23-0808 (Fla. 1st DCA 2025).
Contract interpretation requires a contextual reading of the entire agreement, including prefatory language that establishes the contract’s purpose and scope. As a result, courts cannot determine the correct interpretation of select provisions in isolation but must consider prefatory text alongside operative provisions to determine which permissible meaning the dispositive text reasonably bears.
City of Miami v. Alvarez, Case No. 3D24-2022 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025).
Municipal sovereign immunity under Florida Statute section 768.28(9)(a) bars liability when a municipality’s employee acts in bad faith or with malicious purpose or willful disregard of rights, including those acts committed "in bad faith or with malicious purpose or in a manner exhibiting wanton and willful disregard of human rights, safety, or property.” Accordingly, civil conspiracy allegations requiring proof of intentional, malicious conduct necessarily trigger statutory immunity exception.
Nichols v. City of Miami Beach, Case No. 3D24-0649 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025).
Municipal zoning ordinances restricting short-term rentals satisfy the rational basis test when rationally related to the legitimate government purpose of preserving residential character within the municipality.
Polycarpe v. Federal National Mortgage Association, Case No. 4D2024-3225 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025).
A quiet title action requires the plaintiff to possess legal or equitable title to property and a party who loses title through valid foreclosure cannot maintain quiet title action.
Storey Mountain, LLC v. Ashco, Inc., Case No. 5D2024-2480 (Fla. 5th DCA 2025).
Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b) embodies equitable principles allowing courts to prevent substantial forfeiture when a party demonstrates the required elements for relief, and a reasonable misunderstanding of legal obligations by a non-native English speaker constitutes excusable neglect, particularly when defendant credibly believed telephone conversation resolved garnishment matter.
