Spataru v. Ramsay

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Spataru v. Ramsay

239 So. 3d 763

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 7, 2018

DocketNo. 3D17–671

StatusPublished

This text of 239 So. 3d 763 (Spataru v. Ramsay) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Spataru v. Ramsay, 239 So. 3d 763 (Fla. Ct. App. 2018).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Santa Rosa Cty. v. Administration Com'n, Div. of Admin. Hearings, 661 So.2d 1190, 1193 (Fla. 1995) (observing that "Florida courts will not render, in the form of a declaratory judgment, what amounts to an advisory opinion at the instance of parties who show merely the possibility of legal injury on the basis of a hypothetical 'state of facts which have not arisen' and are only 'contingent, uncertain, [and] rest in the future.' " (quoting *764LaBella v. Food Fair, Inc., 406 So.2d 1216, 1217 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) ) (additional citations omitted) ) ); Behm v. Campbell, 925 So.2d 1070 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (holding that defendant's plea of no contest, accompanied by a withhold of adjudication of guilt, nevertheless established probable cause for the defendant's arrest and precluded a collateral challenge of the legality of that arrest by way of a civil suit for false arrest).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Santa Rosa Cty. v. Administration Com'n, Div. of Admin. Hearings, 661 So.2d 1190, 1193 (Fla. 1995) (observing that "Florida courts will not render, in the form of a declaratory judgment, what amounts to an advisory opinion at the instance of parties who show merely the possibility of legal injury on the basis of a hypothetical 'state of facts which have not arisen' and are only 'contingent, uncertain, [and] rest in the future.' " (quoting *764LaBella v. Food Fair, Inc., 406 So.2d 1216, 1217 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) ) (additional citations omitted) ) ); Behm v. Campbell, 925 So.2d 1070 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (holding that defendant's plea of no contest, accompanied by a withhold of adjudication of guilt, nevertheless established probable cause for the defendant's arrest and precluded a collateral challenge of the legality of that arrest by way of a civil suit for false arrest).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

239 So. 3d 763, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spataru-v-ramsay-fladistctapp-2018.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack