James Moody

The case concerned the interpretation of a will establishing a charitable trust with specified stocks, directing 50% of dividends to St. Mary's Catholic Church, 25% to Bishop Sheen for the Society for the Propagation of the Faith, and 25% to be reinvested in the trust corpus. The lower court upheld the trust for the first 75% but invalidated the 25% accumulation provision as violating the rule against perpetuities, vesting that portion in the decedent's heirs at law. On appeal, the District Court of Appeal of Florida reversed, holding that the accumulation provision in a public charitable trust does not violate the rule against perpetuities or unlawful accumulation rules, as Florida law favors upholding such trusts to effectuate the testator's intent when possible and distinguishes them from private trusts. The court directed further proceedings consistent with validating the full trust terms.

propertyfamily law

In Seminole Shell Company v. Clearwater Flying Company, the plaintiff sued the defendants for damages to its aircraft from a nighttime landing without runway lights, bringing claims for negligence and breach of an oral bailment contract. After a defense verdict, the appellate court reversed and ordered a new trial because the trial court had allowed testimony about the plaintiff's partial insurance recovery, which was irrelevant to the issues and introduced after an inadvertent mention of insurance by a witness. The court held that the subject of insurance was inadmissible absent relevance and that a general curative instruction at the close of evidence was insufficient to remedy the prejudice, while finding no reversible error in the exclusion of an expert deposition or the refusal of a specific jury instruction on concurrent negligence.

torts & liabilityprocedure

The case concerned a suit by Presidential Insurance Company against Abbey Properties and its surety, United Bonding, to recover damages under a bond posted to secure a temporary restraining order in a prior specific performance action involving stock. After the underlying case was dismissed on summary judgment, the trial court awarded Presidential $2,800 in attorney's fees as damages for the wrongful issuance of the order. The appellate court reversed, holding that while attorney's fees are recoverable on an injunction bond, they must be supported by evidence of the reasonable value of services rendered specifically due to the injunction, not based solely on the testimony of the plaintiff's counsel or fees charged for the entire case. The court reasoned that the award improperly included fees for defending the merits rather than only extra expenses from efforts to dissolve the restraining order, and remanded for a new trial on damages.

procedure

The case involved Mathew Smith, who was convicted in Florida's Criminal Court of Record on two counts of lottery law violations based on evidence discovered during a search of his person. Officers stopped Smith after observing him drive, believing his license had been revoked, and upon learning this was his fourth traffic offense decided to take him into custody rather than issue a ticket; they then patted him down and emptied his pockets, finding cash, receipt tapes, and other items tied to lottery activity. Smith moved to suppress the evidence as the product of an illegal search, but the trial court denied the motion. The appellate court affirmed the convictions, holding that the search was lawful as incident to a valid arrest for the traffic violation under Florida statutes, with no indication that the stop was a pretext for the search.

criminal lawprocedure

This case involved an appeal by a workers' compensation insurance carrier challenging a circuit court's apportionment of a $35,000 settlement recovered by a widow from a third-party tortfeasor in a wrongful death action arising from her husband's work-related automobile accident. The lower court awarded the carrier $4,100 as its pro rata share of the settlement after deducting a portion of attorney's fees, rather than full reimbursement of approximately $10,000 in benefits paid. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the statute permits equitable distribution based on factors like the settlement representing only about 38% of the plaintiff's actual damages, and the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in applying these considerations.

labor & employmenttorts & liabilityprocedure

The case involved a Florida estate administrator suing a non-resident daughter and a corporation for an accounting and receiver appointment, alleging fraudulent transfers of assets from a family corporation (Alliance Investment Corporation) and its subsidiary (Soft Water Laundry, Inc.) that deprived the deceased mother's estate of shares and property worth over a million dollars. The trial court dismissed the complaint with prejudice, finding it failed to state a claim against the corporation and lacked personal jurisdiction over the non-resident defendant. The appellate court reversed, holding that the fraud allegations against the corporation were too vague and contradictory to state a cause of action but that the non-resident defendant was subject to Florida jurisdiction under the long-arm statute (Sections 47.16 and 47.30) because her management of Florida corporations and real estate constituted carrying on a business or business venture. It also ruled that the dismissal should not have been with prejudice, as the plaintiff should be allowed to amend the complaint.

business & regulatorypropertyprocedurefamily law