46 Fla. L. Weekly D2601a SUPERIOR AUTO GLASS OF TAMPA BAY, INC. as assignee of DAVID GILBO and RONALD ROBBINS, Petitioner, v. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. 2nd District. Case No. 2D20-3251. December 8, 2021. Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for the Thirteenth Judicial Circuit for Hillsborough County, sitting in its Read More »
Uncategorized
Torts — Automobile accident — Rear-end collision — Trial court erred by interpreting judicially created rear-end presumption of negligence to defeat defendant’s claim of comparative fault — Because there was admissible evidence that defendant was not sole cause of accident, presumption should have vanished and lost its legal effect — Trial court also erred in finding that comparative fault defense was unavailable because defendant could not specifically identify nonparty to whom she sought to allocate fault — Statute provides that defendant need only describe nonparty as specifically as possible when the nonparty’s identity is not known — New trial required on both liability and damages where challenged decision was made at beginning of proceeding and affected its entirety
46 Fla. L. Weekly D2548a CHRISTINE ANN CRIME, Appellant, v. JOHN LOONEY, Appellee. 1st District. Case No. 1D20-1183. November 24, 2021. On appeal from the Circuit Court in Duval County. Bruce Anderson, Judge. Counsel: Matthew J. Conigliaro of Carlton Fields, P.A., Tampa; William C. Gula and Skyler B. Trettis of Vernis & Bowling of St. Read More »
Torts — Premises liability — Discovery — Work product — Incident report — Trial court departed from essential requirements of law by requiring defendant to produce otherwise work-product protected incident report based on mistaken conclusion that portions of incident report contained plaintiff’s witness statement — Incident report did not qualify as a “witness statement” under rule 1.280
46 Fla. L. Weekly D2570a WINN-DIXIE STORES, INC., Petitioner, v. MIRIAM MERCEDES LOPEZ, Respondent. 3rd District. Case No. 3D21-1878. L.T. Case No. 20-25791. December 1, 2021. A Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Pedro P. Echarte, Jr., Judge. Counsel: Kubicki Draper, P.A., and Barbara E. Fox, for petitioner. Jimenez Hart Mazzitelli Read More »
Insurance — Automobile — Standing — Insurable interest — Damages — Loss of use — Breach of contract action alleging that insurer failed to properly repair or replace vehicle — Trial court erred in entering summary judgment in favor of insurer on issue of whether wife had an insurable interest in vehicle that was titled only in husband’s name — Legal title is not required to have an insurable interest — The fact that wife was one of the named insureds in policy on vehicle, alleged she drove the car daily, and made insurance and loan payments on the vehicle created an issue of fact precluding summary judgment — No error in entering summary judgment in favor of insurer regarding insureds’ entitlement to incidental and consequential damages resulting from the loss of use of the vehicle during repair process — Insureds cannot recover extra-contractual consequential damages in breach of contract action because it is a first-party insurance claim and such damages were not contemplated by insurance contract — Furthermore, insurer cannot be liable for loss of use of vehicle because it did not undertake obligation to make repairs by simply advising insureds to make claim with the other motorist’s insurer
46 Fla. L. Weekly D2481b LUCILLE COVINGTON, Appellant, v. STATE FARM FIRE & CASUALTY CO., Appellee. 4th District. Case No. 4D21-377. November 17, 2021. Appeal from the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Giuseppina Miranda, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. COCE12-015922 and CACE19-023070. Counsel: Mariano Gonzalez and Leonardo G. Renaud of the Gonzalez Read More »
Torts — Slip and fall in restaurant — Discovery — Privilege — Work product — In-house incident report and photographs of accident scene — Appeals — Certiorari — Trial court did not depart from essential requirements of law in finding that incident report was prepared by plaintiff, and not by defendant’s assistant manager, such that plaintiff could obtain copy without showing need and undue hardship — Trial court departed from essential requirements of law by forcing production of otherwise privileged photographs that were taken in anticipation of litigation, apparently as a sanction for misstatement in assistant manager’s affidavit as to who took the photographs, where plaintiff failed to make required showing of need and undue hardship
46 Fla. L. Weekly D2460a IMC HOSPITALITY, LLC, etc., Petitioner, v. ROGER LEDFORD, SR., Respondent. 3rd District. Case No. 3D21-1593. L.T. Case No. 19-32735. November 17, 2021. A Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Valerie R. Manno Schurr, Judge. Counsel: Conroy Simberg, and Hinda Klein and Samuel B. Spinner (Hollywood), for Read More »