Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Get alerted any time new stories match your search criteria. Create an alert to follow a developing story, keep current on a competitor, or monitor industry news.
Thank You!
Don’t forget you can visit MyAlerts to manage your alerts at any time.
How To Use Search Constraints
Categorical
judge:"Steven Andrews"
court:Florida
topic:"Civil Appeals"
practicearea:Lobbying
Boolean
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation
"Steven Andrews" OR "Roger Dalton"
Litigation NOT "Roger Dalton"
"Steven Andrews" AND Litigation NOT Florida
Combinations
(Florida OR Georgia) judge:"Steven Andrews"
((Florida AND Georgia) OR Texas) topic:"Civil Appeals"
Appellant home improvement contractors appealed the trial court's order granting partial summary judgment in favor of appellee Commonwealth. The court held that the Home Improvement Consumer Protection Act requires a home improvement contractor to honor a timely cancellation request from a customer without regard to whether the request is made in writing or via some other medium that provides actual notice of cancellation.
Defendant appealed his sentence for a child-pornography related offense and court held that "image," in the moving picture or video context, unambiguously meant "frame," deference to the sentencing guidelines' commentary's 75-images rule was unwarranted under Kisor v. Wilkie, 588 U.S. 558, and the number of frames comprising a moving picture or video would determine the specific sentencing enhancement to be applied. Vacated.
In its § 1925(a) opinion, the court urged the Superior Court to affirm its orders denying in part Monsanto's motion to exclude the testimony of Timur Durrani, M.D. under Frye v. United States, 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923) and Grady v. Frito-Lay, Inc., 839 A.2d 1038 (Pa. 2003), and its order denying Monsanto's motion for summary judgment on failure to warn claims due to federal preemption.
Defendant's petition to strike confessed judgment was denied where grounds raised by defendant were not part of the record the court was required to consider on a petition to strike.
In this § 1925(a) opinion, the court urged the appellate court to affirm its orders docketed on December 13, 2023, that followed its August 30, 2023, order placing residential condominiums in receivership and ordering the defendants to cooperate with the receiver.
Appellants appealed their convictions for transportation of stolen property in interstate commerce and conspiracy to transport stolen property in interstate commerce.
Court denied defendant's motion for disqualification and to vacate but requested that the matter be transferred to another judge to avoid the appearance of impropriety.