46 Fla. L. Weekly S95a IN RE: AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 1.510. Supreme Court of Florida. Case No. SC20-1490. April 29, 2021. Original Proceeding — Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Counsel: Evelyn Fletcher Davis on behalf of Hawkins Parnell & Young LLP, Atlanta, Georgia; Jennifer Marie Voss, Tampa, and Daniel B. Rogers […]
Articles
Civil procedure — Default — Trial court erred in granting motion to vacate default judgment entered in action alleging fraudulent lien on homestead property where defendant failed to establish excusable neglect, meritorious defense, and due diligence — Ignorance of the law does not constitute excusable neglect — Delay of more than five months between learning of default and final judgment and filing of motion to vacate does not constitute due diligence
46 Fla. L. Weekly D914a WENDELL LOCKE, Appellant, v. LEVI WHITEHEAD and NICHOLA WHITEHEAD, Appellees. 4th District. Case No. 4D20-2097. April 21, 2021. Appeal of nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Jeffrey R. Levenson, Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE19022311. Counsel: Wendell Locke of Locke Law, P.A., Plantation, for […]
Torts — Jurors — For-cause challenge — Denial — New trial — Claim that plaintiff was denied a fair trial because trial court erroneously denied plaintiff’s for-cause challenge of a potential juror, forcing plaintiff to use a peremptory strike and leaving plaintiff without a challenge to strike another specified juror plaintiff found subjectively objectionable — Based on the methodology the trial court used for jury selection whereby six randomly selected jurors would be put “in the box” as a panel of presumptive principal jurors followed by two separate groups of presumptive alternatives and “on deck” jurors, plaintiff’s claim of error could not have resulted in a miscarriage of justice — Even if plaintiff had a peremptory strike left for the specified juror, plaintiff still would have had a juror plaintiff found subjectively objectionable serving on his jury because of the process by which struck jurors were replaced from the two groups of alternative jurors — In the absence of a demonstration by plaintiff that a miscarriage of justice stemmed from asserted error by the trial court, appellate court has no authority to reverse or grant a new trial
46 Fla. L. Weekly D938a JAMES SEADLER, Appellant, v. MARINA BAY RESORT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. d/b/a MARINA BAY RESORT, Appellee. 1st District. Case No. 1D19-850. April 26, 2021. On appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County. William F. Stone, Judge. Counsel: Charles F. Beall, Jr., and Haley J. VanFleteren of Moore, Hill & Westmoreland, […]
Insurance — Bad faith — Premature claims — Appeals — Certiorari — Petition seeking review of order denying insurers’ motion to dismiss insured’s claim of breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing — Insured’s claim is merely a cloaked claim for bad faith and is therefore premature in the absence of a coverage determination — Despite prematurity, petition is denied where binding precedent precludes a finding of irreparable harm
46 Fla. L. Weekly D902a NATIONAL FIRE & MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al., Petitioners, v. INFINITY BISCAYNE MYRTLE MEMBERS, LLC, Respondent. 3rd District. Case No. 3D21-0120. L.T. Case No. 20-20577. April 21, 2021. On Petition for Writ of Certiorari from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Veronica Diaz, Judge. Counsel: Butler Weihmuller Katz Craig LLP, […]
Winn-Dixie, website, customers, prescription, place of public accommodation, coupons, refills, privileges, disabled, advantages, accommodations, visually-impaired, auxiliary, public accommodation, inaccessible, barrier, offerings, sighted, majority opinion, intangible, enjoyment, locator, rewards, card, district court, facilities, shopping, software, communicate, in-store – The difficulties caused by the customer’s inability to access much of the store’s website constituted a concrete and particularized injury that was not conjectural or hypothetical, and would continue if the website remained inaccessible; [2]-The statutory language in Title III of the ADA defining “public accommodation” was unambiguous and clear, and public accommodations were limited to actual, physical places, and websites were not a place of public accommodation under the statute; [3]-The store’s website did not constitute an intangible barrier to the customer’s ability to access and enjoy fully the physical grocery store; [4]-Absent congressional action that broadened the definition of “places of public accommodation” to include websites, the appellate court could not extend ADA liability to the facts presented.
2021 U.S. App. LEXIS 10024 Judges: Before JILL PRYOR and BRANCH, Circuit Judges, and REEVES,* District Judge. Opinion by:BRANCH Opinion BRANCH, Circuit Judge: Appellant Winn–Dixie Stores, Inc. (“Winn–Dixie“), a grocery store chain, operates a website for the convenience of its customers but does not offer any sales directly through the site. Appellee Juan Carlos Gil (“Gil”) is a long-time customer with a visual disability who […]