Appeals — Certiorari — Discovery orders — Insurer failed to demonstrate that trial court departed from essential requirements of law by allowing insured to take deposition of insurer’s representative after insurer had filed a confession of judgment acknowledging that insured was entitled to coverage for personal injury protection benefits and coverage for any property damage claims against him — Confession of judgment did not end case, as issue of damages remained to be adjudicated — Fact that deposition of insurer’s agent could potentially lack relevancy on outstanding damages issue is not basis for certiorari relief
44 Fla. L. Weekly D1951b
The materials available at this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this Website or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Abbey, Adams, Byelick & Mueller, L.L.P. and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney.
opens in a new windowAbbey, Adams, Byelick, & Mueller XML Sitemap Index