Integrity. Experience. Results.
(813) 685-8600
Cox Law Office
156 East Bloomingdale Ave.,
Brandon, 33511
Phone: (813) 685 8600
Have a question about Florida law? Cox Law, PLLC provides case law updates covering a wide range of Florida legal topics, including real estate, construction, civil litigation, and more. Feel free to reach out to us at webquestion@coxlawplc.com.
Disclaimer: The information provided on this page is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Reading or interacting with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and Cox Law, PLLC. Each legal matter is unique, and the information contained herein may not apply to your specific situation. Do not act or refrain from acting based on any content on this site without seeking appropriate legal counsel. If you have a specific legal concern, please consult a licensed attorney. Contacting us via email does not establish an attorney-client relationship.
Holding It is not necessary to establish good cause or excusable neglect to avoid dismissal under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.070(j). The rule may be found at https://coxlawflorida.com/florida-rules-of-civil-procedure/rule-1-070-process/
Holding The trial court was authorized by the declaratory judgment statute to declare the ownership structure of corporation, and to declare rights, status,
Holding. An insured seeking uninsured motorist benefits is entitled to a determination of liability and the full extent of the insured’s damages in the UM
Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.530(a) provides for a motion for rehearing on a summary judgment to allow the Court to take additional evidenced and enter a new judgment.
The business records exception found in Fla. Stat. §90.803(6) allows a party to introduce evidence that would normally be inadmissible hearsay if: (1) the record
The Third District Court of Appeal granted State Farm’s writ of certiorari finding that the trial court departed from essential requirements of law when ordering
A motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint. Bess v. Eagle Capital, Inc., 704 So.2d 621 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) A court may not go
Affirmative defenses cannot be raised by a motion to dismiss, unless “the face of the complaint is sufficient to demonstrate the existence of the defense.”
Liquidated damages are “specific and precise sums of money immediately apparent from the express terms of the contract itself, or determinable therefrom by mathematical calculation,
A directed verdict is not appropriate in cases where there is conflicting evidence as to causation. Sanders v. ERP Operating Ltd. P’ship, 157 So.3d 273
Holding It is not necessary to establish good cause or excusable neglect to avoid dismissal under Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.070(j). The rule may be found at https://coxlawflorida.com/florida-rules-of-civil-procedure/rule-1-070-process/
Holding The trial court was authorized by the declaratory judgment statute to declare the ownership structure of corporation, and to declare rights, status,
Holding. An insured seeking uninsured motorist benefits is entitled to a determination of liability and the full extent of the insured’s damages in the UM
Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.530(a) provides for a motion for rehearing on a summary judgment to allow the Court to take additional evidenced and enter a new judgment.
The business records exception found in Fla. Stat. §90.803(6) allows a party to introduce evidence that would normally be inadmissible hearsay if: (1) the record
The Third District Court of Appeal granted State Farm’s writ of certiorari finding that the trial court departed from essential requirements of law when ordering
A motion to dismiss tests the legal sufficiency of the complaint. Bess v. Eagle Capital, Inc., 704 So.2d 621 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) A court may not go
Affirmative defenses cannot be raised by a motion to dismiss, unless “the face of the complaint is sufficient to demonstrate the existence of the defense.”
Liquidated damages are “specific and precise sums of money immediately apparent from the express terms of the contract itself, or determinable therefrom by mathematical calculation,
A directed verdict is not appropriate in cases where there is conflicting evidence as to causation. Sanders v. ERP Operating Ltd. P’ship, 157 So.3d 273