44 Fla. L. Weekly D2304a Insurance — Homeowners — Appraisal — Insurer agreeing that a portion of claim was covered while also asserting that amount of loss did not exceed the deductible and that balance of claimed loss constituted pre-existing damage — Trial court erred in denying insurer’s motion to compel appraisal because insurer did Read More »
Articles
Torts — Negligence — Attorney’s fees — Offer of judgment — Judgment which exceeded more than 25% of offer only when award of punitive damages was taken into account — Error to find that plaintiff was entitled to recover attorney’s fees and investigative costs pursuant to section 768.79 where plaintiff had yet to add a punitive damages claim to complaint at the time offer of judgment was made, and offer explicitly disclaimed punitive damages — Offers of judgment must be evaluated as of the time of the offer and must be as specific as possible, leaving no ambiguities so that the recipient can fully evaluate its terms and conditions
44 Fla. L. Weekly D1936e Torts — Negligence — Attorney’s fees — Offer of judgment — Judgment which exceeded more than 25% of offer only when award of punitive damages was taken into account — Error to find that plaintiff was entitled to recover attorney’s fees and investigative costs pursuant to section 768.79 where plaintiff Read More »
Torts — Automobile accident — Discovery — Experts — Undisclosed testimony — Trial court abused its discretion in allowing plaintiff’s expert to testify for the first time at trial about a prior MRI that plaintiff’s expert was not shown until well after discovery deadlines expired — Defendants were prejudiced by plaintiff’s intentional noncompliance with pre-trial discovery order where defendants had given an opening statement telling the jury that plaintiff’s expert was giving opinions without having all the necessary information, and defendants relied on defense expert being the only witness who had compared the prior MRI and the MRI conducted after the accident at issue in the case — Prejudice also arose from the fact that defendants had to confront undisclosed additional testimony from plaintiff’s expert regarding the comparability of the two different MRIs — Prejudice from a mid-trial medical examination is not merely due to the nature of the new and undisclosed testimony, but also a result of the surprised party’s inability to counter the new testimony — The time for development of new testimony is long past after opening statements unless extraordinary circumstances exist
44 Fla. L. Weekly D1789a Torts — Automobile accident — Discovery — Experts — Undisclosed testimony — Trial court abused its discretion in allowing plaintiff’s expert to testify for the first time at trial about a prior MRI that plaintiff’s expert was not shown until well after discovery deadlines expired — Defendants were prejudiced by Read More »
Torts — Breach of fiduciary duty — Negligence — Unauthorized release of medical records — Trial court erred in holding that plaintiff could not bring a claim for breach of fiduciary duty based on defendant’s unauthorized disclosure of plaintiff’s medical records where the requirement of doctor-patient confidentiality creates a relation of trust and confidence between the parties giving rise to a fiduciary duty, the breach of which is actionable in tort — Error to grant summary judgment based on determination that plaintiff failed to show a causal link between the negligent act and plaintiff’s injury where issue of causation should have been submitted to a jury because plaintiff submitted a reasonable theory that defendant’s release of medical information to plaintiff’s employer resulted in his termination for psychiatric reasons
43 Fla. L. Weekly D2505b Torts — Breach of fiduciary duty — Negligence — Unauthorized release of medical records — Trial court erred in holding that plaintiff could not bring a claim for breach of fiduciary duty based on defendant’s unauthorized disclosure of plaintiff’s medical records where the requirement of doctor-patient confidentiality creates a relation Read More »
Insurance — Homeowners — Water intrusion into home caused by septic tank backup — Trial court did not err in entering final summary judgment for insurer based on conclusion that insureds failed to overcome presumption that their failure to timely report claim had prejudiced insurer’s investigation — Although there may have been disputed issues of fact as to whether insurer was prejudiced in determining cause of loss, facts, even as presented by insured’s adjuster and engineer, showed that insurer would be prejudiced by passage of time in investigating extent of loss, and thus, the cost of repair
43 Fla. L. Weekly D1116a Insurance — Homeowners — Water intrusion into home caused by septic tank backup — Trial court did not err in entering final summary judgment for insurer based on conclusion that insureds failed to overcome presumption that their failure to timely report claim had prejudiced insurer’s investigation — Although there may Read More »