Ziccardi v. Strother

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “the general rule against retrospective operation of statutes” does not apply to remedial statutes (quoting City of Lakeland v. Catinella, 129 So.2d 133, 136 (Fla.1961))
• finding that the Civil Remedies for Criminal Practices Act was remedial in nature
• modification of the burden of proof in a statute did not amount to substantive change in the law
• modification of the burden of proof in a statute did not amount to substantive change in the law
• section 772.104, enacted in 1986 to correct problems resulting from including its RICO predecessor, section 895.05, in the criminal statutes, was remedial, and applicable to cause of action that accrued in 1979

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).