Supreme Court of Florida· 1/5/2012

Johnson v. State

Citations

78 So. 3d 1305
37 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1
2012 Fla. LEXIS 22
2012 WL 16692

How courts have described this case

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

holding a litigant has standing if “he or she reasonably expects to be affected by the outcome of the proceedings, either directly or indirectly” (quoting Hayes v. Guardianship of 952 So. 2d 498, 505 (Fla. 2006))
“Determining whether a party has standing is a pure question of law to be reviewed de novo.”
considering the statute’s “plain language, the title of the statutes, and the legislative history” and rejecting the Fourth District Court of Appeal’s statutory interpretation
\Judicial interpretations of statutes are pure questions of law subject to de novo review.\ (citing State v. Sigler, 967 So. 2d 835, 841 (Fla. 2007))
“Judicial interpretations of statutes are pure questions of law subject to de novo review.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Canady, Labarga, Lewis, Pariente, Perry, Polston, Quince

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

21 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

32 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.