Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§

First Natl. Bk. T. v. Great Am. Ins. Co.

257 So. 2d 73 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
First Natl. Bk. T. v. Great Am. Ins. Co.

4 Citing cases

  1. Inv. Income Realty, Inc. v. Bentley

    480 So. 2d 219 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)   Cited 5 times
    In Bentley, a landlord chose to mail a notice to pay rent or vacate rather than to hand deliver the notice or to leave a copy of it at the residence.

    Since the case was dismissed on procedural grounds, the decision of the lower court did not rest upon this question. A prior judicial determination of the certified question is necessary before an appellate court may properly be called upon to answer it. First National Bank and Trust Co. v. Great American Insurance Co., 257 So.2d 73 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972). Accordingly, the trial court's order of dismissal is

  2. Iorio v. State

    297 So. 2d 116 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)   Cited 1 times

    Upon examination of Rule 4.6, F.A.R., 32 F.S.A., pertaining to certified questions and consideration of the applicable authorities interpreting such rule, we must respectfully decline to answer the question. Miller v. Esca Rosa Development Corporation, Fla.App. 1973, 284 So.2d 227; First National Bank T. Co. v. Great American Ins. Co., Fla.App. 1972, 257 So.2d 73; City of Hollywood v. Peck, Fla. 1952, 57 So.2d 842. The question presented is one which the trial court has the power to adjudicate and is reviewable on appeal; furthermore, this court's determination would not necessarily be dispositive of the cause. State v. Kanter, Fla.App. 1973, 273 So.2d 772; State v. Brooks, Fla.App. 1972, 269 So.2d 23; In re Adoption of Taylor, Fla.App. 1964, 166 So.2d 476; cf. United States v. Gaines, 5 Cir. 1974, 489 F.2d 690.

  3. Miller v. Esca Rosa Development Corp.

    284 So. 2d 227 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)   Cited 3 times

    We respectfully decline to answer the certified questions for the reason that the "Circuit Court cannot divest itself of its original jurisdiction which is prescribed and ordained by the Constitution. Nor, by the same token, can this appellate Court preempt that trial jurisdiction." First National Bank T. Co. v. Great American Ins. Co., 257 So.2d 73 (2 Fla.App. 1972). The causes are remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

  4. State v. Kanter

    273 So. 2d 772 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)   Cited 2 times

    Upon a review of the certificate forwarded to us pursuant to Rule 4.6, F.A.R., 32 F.S.A., and an examination of the applicable authorities, we must respectfully decline to answer the question. Boyer v. City of Orlando, Fla. 1970, 232 So.2d 169; First National Bank T. Co. v. Great American Ins. Co., Fla.App. 1972, 257 So.2d 73; In re Adoption of Taylor, Fla.App. 1964, 166 So.2d 476; City of Hollywood v. Peck, Fla. 1952, 57 So.2d 842; Laytner v. State, Fla.App. 1970, 239 So.2d 857; State v. Harris, Fla. 1962, 136 So.2d 633. The question presented to us is one which the trial court has the power to adjudicate and which may be reviewed on appeal; furthermore, this court's determination would not necessarily be dispositive of the case.