Cases from cite.case.law:

TOOLE, v. STATE, 270 So. 3d 371 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . . § 90.705(2) (2014) (providing that if the defendant "establishes prima facie evidence that the expert . . .

RODRIGUES, v. STATE, 142 So. 3d 901 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 933 So.2d 124, 127 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); see also § 90.705(1), Fla. . . .

SNELGROVE, v. STATE, 107 So. 3d 242 (Fla. 2012)

. . . .); see also § 90.705(1), Fla. . . .

SUNBEAM TELEVISION CORPORATION, v. A. MITZEL,, 83 So. 3d 865 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . Section 90.705 Florida Statutes (1989), states that if a “party establishes prima facie evidence that . . .

COX, v. ST. JOSEPHS HOSPITAL,, 71 So. 3d 795 (Fla. 2011)

. . . See also § 90.705(2), Fla. . . .

MITSUBISHI MOTORS CORPORATION, v. LALIBERTE, T., 52 So. 3d 31 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . testimony and Plaintiffs may request a voir dire examination of the expert under Florida Statute § 90.705 . . .

SPECIAL, v. BAUX, M. D. M. D. P. A. P. L., 52 So. 3d 682 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . .§ 90.705(1), Fla. . . . The Ascent of Man (episode 4, Fires, Metals and Alchemy). . § 90.705(1), Fla. . . .

SMITH, v. STATE, 28 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2009)

. . . inquire as to the basis supporting his opinion, he could have done so through cross-examination, section 90.705 . . . (1), or voir dire examination, section 90.705(2). . . .

SMITH, v. STATE, 7 So. 3d 473 (Fla. 2009)

. . . Section 90.705(1) permits the expert to testify without prior disclosure of the underlying facts or data . . .

DUEST, v. STATE, 12 So. 3d 734 (Fla. 2009)

. . . State, 608 So.2d 4, 10-11 (Fla.1992) and § 90.705(1), Fla. Stat.). . . .

HAWKER, v. STATE, 951 So. 2d 945 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . for the change unless questioned regarding such on cross-examination under Florida Statutes section 90.705 . . .

DOCTORS COMPANY, v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, 940 So. 2d 466 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Appellee objected to his expert opinion testimony based on section 90.705(2), Florida Statutes (2005) . . . Schacht’s testimony was controlled by section 90.705(2), Florida Statutes (2005), which states: Prior . . . The provisions of section 90.705(2), relating to the procedure for discovering the foundation of an expert . . .

HAYES, v. WAL- MART STORES, INC,, 933 So. 2d 124 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Section 90.705(1) provides: (1) Unless otherwise required by the court, an expert may testify in terms . . .

FRIED, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 904 So. 2d 566 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . Under sections 90.704 and 90.705, Florida Statutes, an expert may state his or her opinion without setting . . .

SMITH, v. STATE, 873 So. 2d 585 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . See § 90.705, Fla. Stat. (2000). . . . , Florida Statutes, as follows: 90.705. . . . The Fourth District specifically rejected the State’s argument, stating that section 90.705 “supplies . . . He states that: even if Reaves and Gore were mistaken in asserting that section 90.705 does not apply . . . are not persuaded that simply because the State intends to use it in cross-examination under section 90.705 . . .

DUEST, v. STATE, 855 So. 2d 33 (Fla. 2003)

. . . State, 608 So.2d 4, 10-11 (Fla.1992); § 90.705(1), Fla. . . .

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, v. ARMADILLO PARTNERS, INC., 849 So. 2d 279 (Fla. 2003)

. . . form of an opinion; however, the opinion is admissible only if it can be applied to evidence at trial. 90.705 . . .

CARRATELLI, v. STATE, 832 So. 2d 850 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . Section 90.705(1), Florida Statutes (2001) allows an expert to “testify in terms of opinion or inferences . . .

RIMMER, v. STATE FLORIDA,, 825 So. 2d 304 (Fla. 2002)

. . . See § 90.705, Fla. . . .

BENARDO, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, J. REILLY,, 819 So. 2d 161 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . records, and the opinion of paternity contained in the report would be admissible under sections 90.701 — 90.705 . . .

STEWART STEVENSON SERVICES, INC. v. WESTCHESTER FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 804 So. 2d 584 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . Section 90.705(1) of the Florida Statutes (1999) provides that on cross-examination an expert “shall . . .

K. VEREB B. v. SARDONI, 795 So. 2d 260 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . business record] under paragraph (a) unless such opinion or diagnosis would be admissible under ss. 90.701-90.705 . . .

D. DAMEN, v. STATE, 793 So. 2d 106 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . Finally, we recognize that section 90.705, Florida Statutes (1999), permits an expert to opine without . . . Nonetheless, without either objection or the procedural invocation of section 90.705(2), Florida Statutes . . .

ATTORNEY AD LITEM FOR D. K. a v. PARENTS OF D. K., 780 So. 2d 301 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . Moreover, under section 90.705(1) an expert testifying to an opinion may be required, on cross-examination . . .

R. McELROY, E. v. C. PERRY,, 753 So. 2d 121 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . admissible under paragraph (a) unless such opinion or diagnosis would be admissable under §§ 90.701-90.705 . . .

A. MORRIS, v. CRAWFORD,, 718 So. 2d 354 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . and that the opinion of paternity contained in the report would be admissible under sections 90.701-90.705 . . . and that the opinion of paternity contained in the report would be admissible under sections 90.701-90.705 . . .

CARRIER, v. W. RAMSEY L., 714 So. 2d 657 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . .” § 90.705(2), Fla. Stat. (1997). . . .

WITCHELL a k a A. v. J. H. LONDONO,, 707 So. 2d 796 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . The admissibility of expert opinion is governed by section 90.705, Florida Statutes, which provides: . . .

CENTEX- ROONEY CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. St. v. MARTIN COUNTY,, 706 So. 2d 20 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . Moreover, section 90.705(1), Florida Statutes (1995), provides that: [u]nless otherwise required by the . . . Black, 434 So.2d 988, 993 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), section 90.705(2) requires the party against whom the . . . See § 90.705(2). . . .

MYRON, a By BROCK, B. B. v. SOUTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT, d b a, 703 So. 2d 527 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . Under section 90.705, Florida Statutes (1993), an expert may testify in the form of an opinion without . . .

HECKFORD, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS,, 699 So. 2d 247 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . admissible under paragraph (a) unless such opinion or diagnosis would be admissible under ss. 90.701-90.705 . . .

CENTRAL FLORIDA PLASTERING AND DEVELOPMENT, v. SOVRAN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., 679 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . Relying on subsection 90.705(2), Florida Statutes (1995), CFP correctly argues that Mr. . . .

BROCK, v. STATE, 676 So. 2d 991 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

. . . admissible under paragraph (a) unless such opinion or diagnosis would be admissible under ss. 90.701-90.705 . . .

DOMINO S PIZZA, v. E. GIBSON,, 668 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 1996)

. . . Furthermore, the Florida Tile interpretation contradicts sections 90.702-90.705, Florida Statutes (1991 . . .

N. T. DOLAN, v. SPRINGLITE BOTTLED WATER CORP., 656 So. 2d 211 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . . § 90.705(2), Fla.Stat. (1991); Newell v. Best Sec. Sys., Inc., 560 So.2d 395 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). . . .

FINKELSTEIN, a k a TOC v. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION,, 656 So. 2d 921 (Fla. 1995)

. . . field of real property valuation, section 90.704, Florida Statutes (1993), and pass the test of section 90.705 . . . If respondent’s expert meets the test of section 90.705(2), Florida Statutes (1993), which we have set . . .

ESTY, v. STATE, 642 So. 2d 1074 (Fla. 1994)

. . . of opinion testimony of State’s blood identification expert without proper predicate under section 90.705 . . . defense counsel objected on the basis that a proper predicate had not been established under section 90.705 . . . An expert may testify without disclosing the facts or data upon which an opinion is based. § 90.705(1 . . . Thus, section 90.705(2) provides that “[pjrior to the witness giving his opinion, a party against whom . . . Section 90.705, Florida Statutes (1991), provides: (1) Unless otherwise required by the court, an expert . . .

JACKSON, v. STATE, 648 So. 2d 85 (Fla. 1994)

. . . . § 90.705(1), Fla.Stat. (1991). . . .

EASLEY, v. STATE, 629 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . the subject to support the opinion expressed, the facts or data need not be admissible in evidence. 90.705 . . .

J. LOVE, v. GARCIA,, 611 So. 2d 1270 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . admissible under paragraph (a) unless such opinion or diagnosis would be admissible under ss. 90.701-90.705 . . .

GORE, v. STATE, 614 So. 2d 1111 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . into the facts underlying an opposing expert witness’s opinion is covered by Florida Stat.Ann. section 90.705 . . . , which provides: 90.705 Disclosure of facts or data underlying expert opinion.— (1) Unless otherwise . . . See § 90.705, Fla.Stat. (1991). . . .

YOUNG- CHIN, v. CITY OF HOMESTEAD, d b a M. D. M. D. P. A., 597 So. 2d 879 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

. . . Section 90.705 Florida Statutes (1989), states that if a “party establishes prima facie evidence that . . .

DEMPSEY, v. SHELL OIL COMPANY, a J., 589 So. 2d 373 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . And, subsection 2 of Section 90.705 provides that before an expert witness gives his opinion, the party . . . Black, 434 So.2d 988, 993, footnote 8 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), with specific reference to Section 90.705, . . .

In E. C. a, 582 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . Section 90.705, Florida Statutes; City of Hialeah v. . . .

VALLE, v. STATE, 581 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 1991)

. . . State, 476 So.2d 134 (Fla.1985); see § 90.705, Fla.Stat. (1987). . . .

MARKS, v. S. MARKS,, 576 So. 2d 859 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . See § 90.705(1), Fla.Stat. (1989). . . .

SHELDON GREENE ASSOCIATES, INC. a v. WILLIAMS ISLAND ASSOCIATES, a, 571 So. 2d 549 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . Nezelek, Inc., 414 So.2d 535, 538-39 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), rev. denied, 426 So.2d 27 (Fla.1983); § 90.705 . . .

FERGUSON, v. A. WILLIAMS,, 566 So. 2d 9 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . and that the opinion of paternity contained in the report would be admissible under sections 90.701-90.705 . . .

NEWELL, v. BEST SECURITY SYSTEMS, INC., 560 So. 2d 395 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . . § 90.705(2), Fla.Stat. (1987); Highlands Insurance Co. v. . . .

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, STATE OF FLORIDA, v. WILLIAMS,, 549 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . Section 90.705, Florida Statutes (1987) provides: (1) Unless otherwise. required by the court, an expert . . .

LOMBARD, v. EXECUTIVE ELEVATOR SERVICE, INC., 545 So. 2d 453 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . White should not have been excluded since it met all of the requirements of sections 90.702-90.705, Florida . . .

JACKSONVILLE BULLS FOOTBALL, LTD. v. T. BLATT,, 535 So. 2d 626 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

. . . See §§ 90.705, 90.956, Fla.Stat. (1985). . . .

BURNHAM, v. STATE, 497 So. 2d 904 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . Rather than allowing appellant to do so as dictated by section 90.704, and section 90.705, Florida Statutes . . .

CITY OF MIAMI, v. HARRIS, a k a, 490 So. 2d 69 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Black, 434 So.2d 988, 993 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); § 90.705(2), Fla.Stat. (1983). . . .

LOPEZ, v. STATE, 478 So. 2d 1110 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . . § 90.705(2), Fla.Stat. (1983). . . .

GIW SOUTHERN VALVE COMPANY, v. C. SMITH,, 471 So. 2d 81 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Plaintiff, citing section 90.705 of the Evidence Code, contends that it was defendant’s burden to establish . . . Under section 90.705 “the burden of challenging the sufficiency of the basis for the opinion rests with . . .

CITY OF HIALEAH, v. WEATHERFORD, N., 466 So. 2d 1127 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . Section 90.705, Florida Statutes (1981) provides: Disclosure of facts or data underlying expert opinion . . .

TOWN OF ORANGE PARK, v. F. POPE, K., 459 So. 2d 418 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . Section 90.705(2), Florida Statutes (1983) provides: Prior to the [expert] witness giving his opinion . . .

DUTILLY, v. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH REHABILITATIVE SERVICES,, 450 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . admissible under paragraph (a) unless such opinion or diagnosis would be admissible under ss. 90.701-90.705 . . . and that the opinion of paternity contained in the report would be admissible under sections 90.701-90.705 . . .

STATE OF FLORIDA v. BURKARD, 6 Fla. Supp. 2d 46 (Palm Beach Cty. Ct. 1983)

. . . Gragor’s opinion under Sections 90.704 and 90.705(1), FLA. STAT. . . .

HUSKY INDUSTRIES, INC. v. L. BLACK a a a a, 434 So. 2d 988 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . Thus, Section 90.705, Florida Statutes (1979), provides in pertinent part: “If the party establishes . . .

PROFFITT, v. L. WAINWRIGHT,, 685 F.2d 1227 (11th Cir. 1982)

. . . . § 90.705 (West 1979); Jones v. State, 289 So.2d 725, 727 (Fla. 1974). See also Brady v. . . .

POPE v. BANYAN TREE VILLAGE CONDOMINIUM ASSN., 3 Fla. Supp. 2d 178 (Fla. Cir. Ct. 1982)

. . . admissible under paragraph (a) unless such opinion or diagnosis would be admissible under ss. 90.701-90.705 . . .

DANDASHI v. B. FINE, M. D. M. D., 397 So. 2d 442 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . We note that the Evidence Code, Sections 90.703, 90.704, 90.705, Florida Statutes (1979), changes Florida . . . Section 90.705 now permits the expert to render his opinion without prior disclosure of the underlying . . . The Sponsors’ Note following § 90.705, (6C Fla. . . .