Abbey Adams Logo

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

Articles

by

Civil rights — Disabled persons — Americans with Disabilities Act — Exemptions — Private clubs — Member of yacht club sued club for discrimination and retaliation under Americans with Disabilities Act and Florida Civil Rights Act based on club’s refusal to let her bring her service dog into clubhouse and club’s suspension and expulsion of her from its membership after she filed administrative complaint with local civil rights authority — Discrimination — District court erred in granting club summary judgment on discrimination claims based on club’s status as private club exempt from ADA — Record does not establish that club is a “private club” exempt from Title III of ADA or Florida Civil Rights Act — Based on text of statute and binding precedent, Eleventh Circuit derived a general definition of private club: “A ‘private club’ is an organization that uses ‘self-government and member-ownership’ and pursues a ‘plan or purpose of exclusiveness’ by acting to ensure ‘seclusion from others in critical aspects of the relationship[s]’ between members at its facilities” — Club is not entitled to benefit of private-club exception where record does not establish that club acts to ensure “seclusion from others in critical aspects of the relationships between members” at club facilities, and club failed to develop an undisputed record that it pursues a plan or purpose of exclusiveness — Retaliation — District court did not err by granting club summary judgment on retaliation claim under Title V of ADA, alleging club retaliated against its member for filing administrative complaint with local civil rights authority, where club stated that it suspended and expelled member in part because she was living on her boat in violation of city lease and club rules and member failed to rebut club’s proffered nondiscriminatory liveaboard justification for member’s suspension and expulsion either before district court or on appeal

29 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. C23a SAMANTHA RING, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BOCA CIEGA YACHT CLUB INC., Defendant-Appellee. 11th Circuit. Case No. 20-11571. July 12, 2021. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida (No. 8:19-cv-00772-VMC-JSS). (Before WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge, LUCK, Circuit Judge, and MARKS,* District Judge.) (WILLIAM PRYOR, Chief Judge.) This […]

by

Torts — Legal malpractice — Insurance — Standing — An insurer has standing to maintain a legal malpractice action against counsel hired to represent its insured where the insurer has a duty to defend and is contractually subrogated to the insured’s rights under the insurance policy

46 Fla. L. Weekly D1627a ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. KUBICKI DRAPER, LLP, a law firm, Appellee. 4th District. Case No. 4D17-2889. July 14, 2021. Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Patti Englander Henning, Judge; L.T. Case No. 08 25361 (26). Counsel: Benjamin J. Biard and Brittany P. Borck […]

by

Attorney’s fees — Proposal for settlement — Entitlement to fees

46 Fla. L. Weekly D1602b KYLECOVEY SMITH, Appellant, v. GADSDEN COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, Appellee. 1st District. Case No. 1D20-1481. July 13, 2021. On appeal from the Circuit Court in Gadsden County. David M. Frank, Judge. Counsel: Kylecovey Smith, pro se, Appellant. William B. Armistead of Coppins Monroe, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellee. (LONG, J.) Mr. Smith […]

by

Wrongful death — Trial court erred in entering summary judgment in favor of defendant where genuine issues of material fact existed regarding legal duty and legal causation

46 Fla. L. Weekly D1588a JESUS G. JOUBERT RODRIGUEZ, etc., et al., Appellants, v. CENTRAL FLORIDA EQUIPMENT RENTALS, INC., Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 3D20-0866. L.T. Case No. 11-23514. July 7, 2021. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Alan Fine, Judge. Counsel: Deehl PLLC and David L. Deehl; Kula & Associates, P.A., […]

by

Insurance — Homeowners — Appraisal — Audio/video recording — Trial court erred in applying section 934.03 to preclude insured from making audio/video record of inspection of insured’s home by insurer’s appraiser absent consent of all participants — For an oral conversation to be protected under the statute, the speaker must have an actual subjective expectation of privacy, along with societal recognition that the expectation is reasonable — Nothing in policy precluded audio/video recording of appraisal inspection, and insurer’s appraiser has no legitimate expectation of privacy while in insured’s home for inspection

46 Fla. L. Weekly D1592 HEATHER SILVERSMITH, Appellant, v. STATE FARM INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee. 4th District. Case No. 4D20-2685. July 7, 2021. Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; John B. Bowman, Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE19-026047. Counsel: Samuel Alexander of Alexander Appellate Law P.A., DeLand, for appellant. Ubaldo J. […]

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.