Abbey Adams Logo

Defending Liability, Workers' Compensation, Employment Claims and Appeals Since 1982

Articles

by

Torts — Automobile accident — Damages — Future medical expenses — Evidence — Expert — Treating physician — Trial court erred by allowing treating physician to offer his detailed opinion regarding plaintiff’s future medical expenses where, although physician’s witness disclosure referenced costs and future medical care, physician was not disclosed as a retained expert and plaintiff had failed to respond to expert discovery regarding treating physician — Treating physician’s opinions as to plaintiff’s future medical treatment and costs, including opinions based on his review of plaintiff’s medical records from other providers, exceeded the scope of a fact witness treating physician and crossed the line into expert testimony — Error in admitting evidence was not harmless — Fact that treating physician only transcribed his opinions concerning future treatment costs two days before he testified does not excuse the nondisclosure — Assuming treating physician truly developed these opinions in the course of treatment as he testified, then plaintiff had every opportunity to ensure that physician’s opinions were contained in medical records or otherwise properly disclosed — Court rejects plaintiff’s argument that opinion was properly admitted because defendant had opportunity to depose physician regarding his opinions on future medical care, but failed to do so — Based on the records disclosed, there was no reason for defendant to believe that treating physician would take the stand prepared to offer detailed projection of plaintiff’s future treatment costs — Remand for new trial

50 Fla. L. Weekly D2282d KRISTOPHER RICHARDSON, Appellant, v. DAERI TENERY, Appellee. 6th District. Case No. 6D2023-2853. L.T. Case No. 2018-CA-013196-O. October 21, 2025. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County. Vincent Falcone, III, Judge. Counsel: Kevin D. Franz, of Boyd & Jenerette, P.A., Boca Raton, and Jennifer A. Karr, of Boyd & Jenerette, Read More »

by

Insurance — Uninsured motorist — Evidence — Expert — Damages — Trial court did not abuse its discretion by excluding insurer’s expert under Binger v. King Pest Control — Trial court erred by entering judgment in an amount which exceeded underlying uninsured motorist policy — Judgments in uninsured motorist cases may not be entered in an amount exceeding policy limits

50 Fla. L. Weekly D2267a GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. PATRICK N. YVARS, Appellee. 6th District. Case No. 6D2023-3281. L.T. Case No. 2020-CA-003972-O. October 17, 2025. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County. Heather Pinder Rodriguez, Judge. Counsel: Sharon C. Degnan, of Kubicki Draper, Orlando, for Appellant. Brian J. Lee, of Morgan & Read More »

by

Torts — Attorney’s fees — Offer of judgment — Enforceability — Trial court did not err by denying plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees based on determination that plaintiff’s offer of judgment, which was directed solely at defendant’s monetary counterclaim, was unenforceable because action involved both a claim for monetary damages and a claim for equitable relief — Discussion of section 768.79 and statutory interpretation — According to its plain language, section 768.79 applies only to civil actions for damages — Even though offer in instant case did not attempt to settle the equitable claim, the reach of section 768.79 does not extend to a pending case where the parties seek both monetary and equitable damages

50 Fla. L. Weekly D2250a BRENDA CORNELIUS, Appellant, v. ARNETTA HAYWOOD, personally and as Personal Representative of the Estate of THOMAS J. KEMP, and ALTAVIA EVANS, Appellees. 4th District. Case No. 4D2024-2185. October 15, 2025. Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Luis Delgado, Judge; L.T. Case No. 502022CA003768XXXX. Read More »

by

Torts — Premises liability — Trip and fall — Public sidewalk — Dangerous condition — Action brought against Department of Transportation and the contractor who built portion of public sidewalk where plaintiff tripped — Trial court did not err by entering summary judgment in favor of defendants based on conclusion that the less-than-one-inch vertical misalignment in public sidewalk was so open, obvious, and ordinary that it did not constitute a dangerous condition as a matter of law — Trial court properly rejected expert’s opinion that building code applied to public sidewalk at issue where express scope of the code prohibits its application to the right-of-way sidewalk where plaintiff fell, and expert was unable to provide any support for his novel interpretation applying the building code to a public sidewalk unconnected to any building or structure

50 Fla. L. Weekly D2224b NANCY JACKSON, Appellant, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION and FERROVIAL INFRASTRUCTURE, INC., Appellees. 5th District. Case No. 5D2024-0202. L.T. Case No. 2021-CA-436. October 10, 2025. On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Robert M. Dees, Judge. Counsel: Brian J. Lee, of Morgan & Morgan, Jacksonville, for Appellant. Hinda Read More »

by

Insurance — Homeowners — Coverage — Windstorm loss — Judgment notwithstanding verdict — Trial court erred by setting aside jury verdict which found that a hurricane created an opening in insureds’ roof that allowed rainwater to enter their residence and that insurer failed to prove the damage was the result of wear and tear — In concluding that neither the homeowners nor their expert specifically identified a specific peril-created opening and that the roof photographs showed no storm-related damage, trial court improperly reweighed conflicting testimony and substituted its own evaluation of the significance of photographic evidence for that of the jury — Competing expert opinions and photographs provided competent substantial evidence from which the jury could conclude that hurricane had created the opening allowing water intrusion — Remand for reinstatement of jury verdict

50 Fla. L. Weekly D2207a LAURA ACOSTA and RUBEN SOLA, Appellants, v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellee. 4th District. Case No. 4D2024-0926. October 8, 2025. Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; William Haury, Jr., Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE 19-10994. Counsel: Paul B. Feltman of Alvarez, Feltman, Da Silva Read More »

The owner of this website has made a commitment to accessibility and inclusion, please report any problems that you encounter using the contact form on this website. This site uses the WP ADA Compliance Check plugin to enhance accessibility.