50 Fla. L. Weekly D894a Torts — Medical malpractice — Jurisdiction — Non-residents — Action brought against non-resident doctors that treated and evaluated patient in New York before referring patient to a Florida provider after patient had moved — No error in dismissing action for lack of personal jurisdiction — Causing injury in state — Read More »
Articles
Civil procedure — Discovery — Text messages — Non-parties — Attorney-client privilege — Work product — Appeals — Certiorari — Trial court departed from essential requirements of the law by categorically denying non-party’s privilege assertions and ordering production of disputed Slack messages without first conducting an in-camera inspection — Messaging communications between a new company’s owner and CEO about legal advice previously received by the owner may be privileged — Furthermore, where communications concern a rival company that has a long-running dispute with the new company’s owner, and has recently sued and settled with new company’s CEO, those communications may be protected work product if they “respond to some event which foreseeably could be made the basis of a claim in the future,” even if made months before any such claim ripens into litigation — Availability of attorney-client privilege did not depend on the participation of an attorney in every communication for which privilege was claimed — Applicability of work product doctrine did not depend on the participation of an attorney in every communication or document for which protection was claimed or the commencement of anticipated litigation within a certain period of time
50 Fla. L. Weekly D901c BREANDEN BENESCHOTT, Appellant, v. TOPTAL, LLC, TASO DU VAL, and DENIS GROSZ, Appellees. 6th District. Case Nos. 6D2023-3769, 6D2023-3789 (Consolidated). L.T. Case No. 2023-CA-002001-0001-XX. April 17, 2025. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Collier County. Ramiro Mañalich, Judge. Counsel: Laura Renstrom, Michael M. Gropper and Michael B. Decembrino, Jr., of Read More »
Insurance — Homeowners — Water damage — Coverage — Conditions precedent — Post-loss obligations — Notice of loss — Prompt notice — Waiver — Civil procedure — Summary judgment — Trial court erroneously determined that, as matter of law, insurer’s acknowledgment of coverage and payment of claim for interior damage caused by roof leak constituted a waiver of further compliance with policy’s conditions precedent, including requirement that insureds provide prompt notice of loss — Under rule 1.110(a), insureds were required to specifically plead waiver as an avoidance of insurer’s lack of prompt notice defense before raising waiver as a basis for granting partial summary judgment in their favor — Insureds’ argument that waiver issue was tried by consent during summary judgment proceedings is misplaced where insurer specifically argued in its response to summary judgment motion that trial court should not consider the waiver argument because insureds never raised the argument in a timely reply to universal’s answer — New trial required
50 Fla. L. Weekly D889a UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. THOMAS J. YAGER and DEBORAH JO YAGER, Appellees. 4th District. Case No. 4D2023-2310. April 16, 2025. Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Daniel A. Casey, Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE21-002362. Counsel: Kara Rockenbach Link and David Read More »
Insurance — Homeowners — All-risk policy — Coverage — Burden of proof — Verdict forms — Trial court abused its discretion by using special verdict form which asked whether insureds had proven by greater weight of the evidence that insureds requested confirmation of coverage and payment for damages, that insurer failed to confirm coverage within required time period, and that insurer had “refused to honor its obligations” under all-risks policy — A plaintiff seeking to recover under an all-risks policy has burden of proving that a loss occurred to insured’s property while policy was in effect — Once a loss within policy period is established, the burden shifts to insurer to prove that loss was excluded from coverage
50 Fla. L. Weekly D820b JEFFREY VASTA and JULIA VASTA, Appellants, v. UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. 2nd District. Case No. 2D2023-1915. April 9, 2025. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Thomas Ramsberger, Judge. Counsel: Matthew Struble of Struble, P.A., Indialantic, for Appellants. David A. Noel and Kara Rockenbach Link of Read More »
Insurance — Property — Water damage — Coverage — Limits of liability — Sewer line backup — No error in granting summary judgment in favor of insurer based on finding that insurer had fulfilled its obligations under policy by paying insureds $10,000 — Insurer was not required to pay for entirety of loss where plain language of the policy excluded any direct or indirect coverage for damage caused by “water, water-borne material, sewage or any other substance on or below the surface of the ground, regardless of its source,” and the limited water damage endorsement only extended $10,000 of coverage for such damage — Court rejects argument that policy exclusion did not apply to damage insureds suffered from their plumbing system because source of water did not come from an outside source — Policy language, which excludes water below the ground that seeps or leaks into property “regardless of its source,” made source of water irrelevant and necessarily included sewage water in ground coming from deteriorated plumbing system backup — Insureds were not entitled to tear-out costs where plain reading of policy makes clear that tear-out coverage was only included as part of water damage that is not otherwise excluded
50 Fla. L. Weekly D830a JEREMY KOSS, et al., Appellants, v. FLORIDA INSURANCE GUARANTY ASSOCIATION, etc., Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 3D21-1904. L.T. Case No. 20-16439. April 9, 2025. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Reemberto Diaz, Judge. Counsel: Rodriguez Tramont & Núñez, P.A., and Paulino A. Núñez, Jr., and Frank R. Read More »