Langley Limited Partnership, LLLP v. School Board of Lake County, 113 So. 3d 995 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)

N/A

OUTCOME:

Mr. Brownlee secured a victory for the Appellant in this case, the Langley Limited Partnership (“Langley”). The School Board of Lake County (“School Board”) obtained a Final Judgment against Langley at ... the trial court level following litigation over a contract dispute. The contract provided that by a date certain, Langley was to deed over a parcel of property to the School Board. On appeal, Langley argued that the School Board’s lawsuit was barred by the Statute of Limitations. The Fifth District Court of Appeal agreed with Langley. The Fifth District reversed the trial court judgment in the School Board’s favor, ordered that Final Judgment be entered for Langley, and ordered the School Board to reimburse the costs associated with Langley’s appeal.

Nieto, et al. v. Mobile Gardens Ass'n of Englewood, Inc., 130 So. 3d 236 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)

N/A

OUTCOME:

Mr. Brownlee represented the Appellants in this case, seven residents of the Mobile Gardens development in Englewood, Florida. The Appellee, a homeowners association, attempted to evict the residents, ... claiming that pursuant to its bylaws, only individuals over the age of 55 were allowed to live in the community. The residents fought the evictions, but the trial court ruled for the homeowners association, finding that the age restrictions were valid. On appeal, however, Mr. Brownlee obtained a reversal of the judgment. He argued that the homeowners association did not have the right to enforce the bylaws. The Second District Court of Appeal agreed. It held that the age-restrictions were unenforceable, reversed the trial court’s judgment, and ordered the homeowners association to pay the attorney’s fees incurred by the residents. After the Second District issued its opinion in favor of the residents, the homeowners association moved for rehearing, requesting that the court reconsider its decision and asking the court to certify a question of great public importance to the Florida Supreme Court. Mr. Brownlee successfully defended his clients against the motion for rehearing, which was denied by the Second District, leaving the victory intact.

Ricks v. Dodier, 119 So. 3d 805 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)

N/A

OUTCOME:

Mr. Brownlee represented the Appellant in this case, a former husband who had a temporary injunction entered against him at the urging of the former wife. The parties agreed to extend the temporary inj ... unction, but the trial court mistakenly entered a permanent injunction against the former husband. On appeal at the Fifth District Court of Appeal, Mr. Brownlee obtained a reversal of the permanent injunction for his client.

United States v. Seecharan, 523 Fed.App'x 679 (11th Cir. 2013)

N/A

OUTCOME:

This was a shocking case. Mr. Brownlee’s client was a severely disabled individual who pled guilty to a non-violent offense in federal court. At sentencing, the client submitted numerous letters from h ... is doctors indicating that imprisonment could lead to amputation of his legs, or death. The Government submitted no evidence showing that that the Bureau of Prisons was equipped to handle the client’s medical needs, or could avoid the terrible fate his doctors predicted. Incredibly, the district court sentenced the client to prison based on a wholly unsubstantiated claim that the Bureau of Prisons could “handle anything.” Mr. Brownlee took the appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit to challenge the sentence of imprisonment. While the appeal was pending, Mr. Brownlee moved the sentencing court to allow his client to remain in home confinement until the appeal was resolved. The sentencing court denied Mr. Brownlee’s motion, and ordered his client to report to prison. Mr. Brownlee filed an emergency request with the Eleventh Circuit, asking it to review the sentencing court’s denial of his motion. The Eleventh Circuit promptly reversed the sentencing court’s decision, and ordered that the client be allowed to remain in home confinement through the conclusion of the appeal. The Eleventh Circuit ultimately reversed the sentence in whole and remanded for resentencing. The Eleventh Circuit held that the sentence of imprisonment was procedurally unreasonable. Specifically, it found that the sentencing court’s conclusion that the Bureau of Prisons could “handle anything” was a clearly erroneous factual determination, as no evidence suggested the Bureau’s claim was accurate.

Rutan v. Rutan, 142 So. 3d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)

N/A

OUTCOME:

Mr. Brownlee’s client was a former husband who was ordered by a trial court to pay monthly alimony to his ex-wife. Mr. Brownlee appealed the alimony decision to Florida’s Second District Court of Appea ... l, arguing that the trial court did not make the necessary findings to support the amount of alimony awarded. In addition, Mr. Brownlee argued that based on the record before the trial court, his client did not have the ability to pay any alimony. The Second District reversed the trial court’s alimony decision because the trial court failed to make findings explaining why the amount of alimony awarded was appropriate. The Second District held that due to the absence of these findings, it could not conclusively determine whether the former husband had the ability to pay any amount of alimony. Thus, the Second District remanded the case back to the trial court to make the requisite findings. In doing so, the Second District gave the trial court some food for thought by noting that the record evidence suggested the alimony awarded exhausts the former husband’s income, which is impermissible under Florida law.

Dippolito v. State, 143 So. 3d 1080 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)

N/A

OUTCOME:

Scott v. Carpanzano, 556 Fed.App'x 288 (5th Cir. 2014)

N/A

OUTCOME:

United States v. Kelley, 774 F.3d 434 (8th Cir. 2014)

N/A

OUTCOME:

Paramo v. Floyd, 154 So. 3d 477 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)

N/A

OUTCOME:

Boumarate v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 172 So. 3d 535 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)

N/A

OUTCOME: