Conflicts

On May 22, a three-judge panel of the First DCA issued BAM Trading Services, Inc. v. State Office of Financial Regulation. The court “respectfully declined” to apply the scope of review announced in a prior panel opinion (State v. Murciano). According to BAM, Murciano’s holding was an “incorrect statement of law.” BAM effectively overrules Murciano on the scope-of-review issue.

Even assuming BAM is correct on the issue, the court’s approach to prior-panel precedent will lead to instability. As Judge Ross Bilbrey stated in his concurrence in Rogers v. State (1st DCA 2020), “[t]he prospect of any three-judge panel being able to overrule any previous panel could lead to chaos.”