50 Fla. L. Weekly D1448a JOHN-LAWRENCE AFRIYIE, Appellant, v. LOUIS FRIEND, Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 3D25-0412. L.T. Case No. 25-218-CA-01. July 2, 2025. An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Daryl E. Trawick, Judge. Counsel: John-Lawrence Afriyie, in proper person. Maguire & Friend, P.A., and Michael R. Friend, […]
Articles
Torts — Premises liability — Supermarket — Transitory foreign substance on floor — Trial court did not err by entering summary judgment in favor of defendant where record was devoid of evidence that defendant had either actual or constructive knowledge of presence of substance
50 Fla. L. Weekly D1333a HECTOR GARCIA, Appellant, v. WINN-DIXIE STORES, INC., Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 3D24-0010. L.T. Case No. 20-6509. June 18, 2025. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Vivianne del Rio, Judge. Counsel: Shannin Law Firm, P.A., and Nicholas A. Shannin and Dayna Maeder (Orlando), for appellant. Cosio Law […]
Torts — Automobile accident — Damages — Future medical expenses — Evidence — Expert — New opinion — Trial court erred by admitting into evidence a cost estimate for plaintiff’s radiofrequency ablation treatment and treating physician’s corresponding testimony where estimate was not prepared or disclosed until after trial had begun, and physician was unable to provide even a rough estimate of total cost during her pre-trial deposition because she lacked personal knowledge — Although defendant was aware of physician’s treatment recommendation, cost estimate and testimony constituted new, undisclosed evidence which subjected defendant to trial by ambush — Defendant could not cure prejudice by having his expert testify about reasonableness of cost estimate where, given timing of new evidence and trial court’s denial of a motion for continuance, defense counsel had insufficient opportunity to consult with defendant’s expert
50 Fla. L. Weekly D1347c JOHN A. MILLER, Appellant, v. JANAY CONNEY, Appellee. 1st District. Case No. 1D2023-1919. June 18, 2025. On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County. Gloria R. Walker, Judge. Counsel: Hinda Klein and Samuel B. Spinner of Conroy Simberg, Hollywood, for Appellant. Michael J. Korn of Korn & Zehmer, P.A., […]
Torts — Negligent training, hiring, and supervision — Timing of training — Sovereign immunity — Discretionary/operational functions — Action alleging that sheriff had failed “to educate and train school resource deputy in properly enforcing Baker Act provisions” — Trial court erred by denying sheriff’s motion for summary judgment on sovereign immunity grounds where complaint was premised upon sheriff’s discretionary, planning-level decisions — Because there was no evidence that sheriff adopted a policy that required school resource deputy to complete Baker Act training or that the deputy did not receive a policy-required training, the trial court erred in concluding that the timeliness of the deputy’s Baker Act training was an operational function — Fact that deputy completed training approximately nine months after encounter giving rise to suit does not establish that sheriff had established policy in place such that timeliness of deputy’s training is an operational function
50 Fla. L. Weekly D1252c Torts — Negligent training, hiring, and supervision — Timing of training — Sovereign immunity — Discretionary/operational functions — Action alleging that sheriff had failed “to educate and train school resource deputy in properly enforcing Baker Act provisions” — Trial court erred by denying sheriff’s motion for summary judgment on sovereign […]
Attorney’s fees — Appellate — Proposal for settlement — Validity of proposal — Insurance — Personal injury protection — Dispute between medical provider and insurer — Trial court erred in denying insurer’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs based on proposal for settlement after finding that proposal was ambiguous or was “designed to extinguish claims that are not part of the instant action” — Proposal for settlement was sufficiently clear and definite to have apprised provider that the proposal sought to resolve or extinguish only the provider’s claims against the insurer set forth in the provider’s complaint, and language reserving any rights or defenses insurer might have in the future relating to the claim at issue did not purport to resolve claims not raised in complaint — Remanded with instructions to grant insurer’s motion for appellate attorney’s fees and for further proceedings
50 Fla. L. Weekly D1203a INFINITY AUTO INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. MIAMI OPEN MRI, LLC, a/a/o Rolando Amador, Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 3D24-0945. L.T. Case No. 17-10295-SP-26. June 4, 2025. An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Patricia Marino Pedraza, Judge. Counsel: Gladys Perez Villanueva, for appellant. Douglas H. Stein, P.A., and […]