Legal Opinion

Bornemann v. Ure

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided August 29, 2002No. SC01-702PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtLewis, J.

We have for review Bornemann v. Ure, 778 So.2d 1077 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), which expressly and directly conflicts with this Court’s decision in Roberts v. Tejada, 814 So.2d 334 (Fla.2002). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. It is clear that the district court below viewed the failure of counsel to discover during trial information concealed by prospective jurors during voir dire as lack of diligence under this Court’s decision in De La Rosa v. Zequeira, 659 So.2d 239 (Fla.1995). Further, the court below reasoned, without stating a “hard and fast rule,” that counsel was…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. De La Rosa v. ZequeiraSupreme Court of Florida · 1995
  2. Roberts Ex Rel. Estate of Roberts v. TejadaSupreme Court of Florida · 2002
  3. Bornemann v. UreDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. American Wall Systems v. Madison Intern.Supreme Court of Florida · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API