Search for: "Florida Carry, Inc." Results 381 - 400 of 711
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Jul 2014, 6:28 pm by Joy Waltemath
The Florida appeals court ruled that collateral estoppel did not apply to completely bar the former employee’s civil claim, but that the trial court should not have dismissed the claim without conducting an evidentiary hearing on the stand-your-ground immunity claim (Professional Roofing and Sales, Inc v Flemmings). [read post]
4 Jun 2014, 9:45 am by Frankl & Kominsky, P.A.
This decision follows passage of Florida House Bill 7015, which amended Section 90.702 of the Florida Evidence Code, the provision governing the admissibility of expert testimony in both civil and criminal litigation. [read post]
4 Jun 2014, 9:45 am by Frankl & Kominsky, P.A.
This decision follows passage of Florida House Bill 7015, which amended Section 90.702 of the Florida Evidence Code, the provision governing the admissibility of expert testimony in both civil and criminal litigation. [read post]
9 May 2014, 3:43 pm by D. Daxton White
Oil and gas investments are speculative investments that carry a high degree of risk and are not appropriate for most investors. [read post]
30 Apr 2014, 11:31 am by Allison Tussey
Musselwhite, who owned Orlando Title and Abstract of Florida, Inc., would wire lender money to American Signature Homes, and Sotolongo would use a portion of the lender money to finance the deposit and closing costs that Musselwhite would collect after the closings. [read post]
For example, in February of this year, the Third District Court of Appeal in Florida, in Gulliver Schools, Inc. v. [read post]
For example, in February of this year, the Third District Court of Appeal in Florida, in Gulliver Schools, Inc. v. [read post]
11 Apr 2014, 7:41 am
By the time the SCOTUS decided the case in 2011, both Smith and Pierce were dead, and their respective estates were carrying on the fight. [read post]
20 Feb 2014, 4:17 am
Florida, for instance, has a Religious Freedom Restoration Act,[65] but when a Muslim woman who wore a full veil sought an exemption from the requirement that every driver have a license with an uncovered photograph, a trial court found that there was a compelling safety interest in denying the exemption.[66] Similarly, a court may conclude that denying a religious exemption from a workplace policy would impose an “undue hardship” on an employer. [read post]