Wood v. Fraser

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a legislature is presumed to adopt prior judicial constructions of a-reenacted statute, but not if the legislature makes a clear expression to the contrary
• allowing trial courts to deviate from stare decisis would result in uncertainty and unpredictability, and “[a]l-though they are free to express their disagreements with decisions of higher courts, trial courts are not free to disregard them in the adjudicatory process.”
• “Although they are free to express their disagreement with decisions of higher courts, trial courts are not free to disregard them in the adjudicatory process.”
• “[I]n the absence of a clear expression from the Florida Supreme Court, the issue of whether [a district court’s] opinion[ ] is in conflict with a later supreme court opinion should be left to [the district court’s] determination.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).