Arreola v. Administrative Concepts

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “In deciding this issue, the JCC had to answer two questions. The first is whether Claimant made or caused to be made false, fraudulent or misleading statements. The second is whether the statement was intended by Claimant to be for the purpose of obtaining benefits.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Carroso v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2013-09-18· cited 1×
• Cal-Maine Foods/Broadspire v. Howard
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2017-07-26· cited 1×
• Carrillo v. Case Engineering, Inc.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2011-02-11· cited 1×
• Edna Hernandez v. Food Market Corp. dba Joseph's Classic Market and AmTrust North America of FL and Associated Industries
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2019-10-30
• City of Hialeah v. Bono
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2017-01-19