CIVIL PROCEDURE: DISCOVERY: DEPOSITIONS: NONRESIDENTS: NONRESIDENT EMPLOYEE OF CORPORATION THAT WAS CLOSELY RELATED TO, BUT SEPARATE FROM, CORPORATE PLAINTIFF COULD NOT BE REQUIRED TO APPEAR FOR DEPOSITION IN FLORIDA; APPEALS: CERTIORARI

Case Decision Date: Reviewed by

Philadelphia Indemnity Insurance Company v. Carlton, ___ So. 3d ___, 40 Fla. L. Weekly D153 (Fla. 4th DCA January 7, 2015)

An insurance company filed a declaratory judgment action against the insured of one of its subsidiaries. The trial court denied the plaintiff’s motion for protective order when the defendant sought to depose a nonresident employee of a corporation … Click To Read Full Case Law Review...

INSURANCE: LIABILITY INSURANCE: ESTOPPEL TO DENY COVERAGE: INSURED’S ALLEGATION THAT INSURER MADE STATEMENTS AND PERFORMED ACTIVITIES THAT LED INSURED TO BELIEVE THAT COVERAGE EXISTED FOR THIRD PARTY LIABILITY CLAIM, DESPITE INSURER’S KNOWLEDGE OF FACTS THAT WOULD HAVE PERMITTED IT TO DENY COVERAGE, STATED CAUSE OF ACTION FOR COVERAGE BY ESTOPPEL; APPEALS: BRIEFS: COURT CRITICIZES, BUT DOES NOT SANCTION, APPELLANT FOR MIS-CERTIFYING THAT INITIAL AND REPLY BRIEFS COMPLIED WITH FONT REQUIREMENTS OF FLA. R. APP. P. 9.210(2)

Case Decision Date: Reviewed by

Bishop v. Progressive Express Insurance Company, ___ So. 3d ___, 40 Fla. L. Weekly D119 (Fla. 1st DCA January 6, 2015)

The appellate court reversed summary judgment for the insurer on a claim for coverage by estoppel. The insured alleged that the insurer made statement and performed activities that led her to believe that she had coverage for a … Click To Read Full Case Law Review...

PUBLIC RECORDS ACT: ATTORNEY’S FEES FOR UNREASONABLE DELAY IN COMPLYING WITH REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS; APPEALS: SANCTIONS: FRIVOLOUS APPEAL: COUNTY WAS LIABLE FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AS A SANCTION FOR FILING A FRIVOLOUS APPEAL, WHICH REARGUED THE SAME POINT UNSUCCESSFULLY RAISED IN A PRIOR APPEAL IN THE SAME CASE: APPELLATE COURT HAD JURISDICTION TO REVIEW, BY MOTION UNDER FLA. R. APP. P. 9.400(c), TRIAL COURT’S NON-FINAL ORDER THAT PETITIONER WAS ENTITLED TO ATTORNEY’S FEES FOR WORK PERFORMED ON FIRST APPEAL BECAUSE RULE 9.400(c) IS NOT LIMITED TO THE REVIEW OF FINAL ORDERS: APPELLATE COURT LACKED JURISDICTION TO REVIEW TRIAL COURT’S NON-FINAL ORDER THAT PETITIONER WAS ENTITLED TO ATTORNEY’S FEES FOR WORK PERFORMED IN THE TRIAL COURT AFTER FIRST APPEAL BECAUSE ORDER DID NOT SET AN AMOUNT: IF ARGUMENT IN THE SECOND APPEAL WAS THE SAME AS THE FIRST APPEAL, CONSIDERATION OF THE REARGUMENT WAS BARRED BY THE DOCTRINE OF THE LAW OF THE CASE: IF NEW ARGUMENTS WERE RAISED IN THE SECOND APPEAL IN SUPPORT OF THE SAME ISSUE ADJUDICATED IN THE FIRST APPEAL, THE NEW ARGUMENTS WERE WAIVED BECAUSE THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN RAISED IN THE FIRST APPEAL: OPINION THAT IS PER CURIAM AFFIRMED LACKS PRECEDENTIAL VALUE: PER CURIAM OPINION POSSESSES PRECEDENTIAL VALUE

Case Decision Date: Reviewed by

Orange County v. Hewlings, ___ So. 3d ___, 39 Fla. L. Weekly D2572 (Fla. 5th DCA December 12, 2014)

When the county imposed artificial barriers to avoid complying with the petitioner’s request for public records, she filed a petition for writ of mandamus and prevailed. Although the county did not appeal and complied with the order, the trial court … Click To Read Full Case Law Review...

REAL ESTATE: MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE: DENIAL OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR ENTITLEMENT TO ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS; APPEALS: APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES UNDER SECTION 57.105, FLORIDA STATUTES, AND FLA. R. APP. P. 9.410(b) MAY NOT BE BASED UPON APPELLEE’S FAILURE TO FILE A CONFESSION OF ERROR WITHIN TWENTY-ONE DAYS

Case Decision Date: Reviewed by

Reznek v. Chase Home Finance, LLC, ___ So. 3d ___, 39 Fla. L. Weekly D2559 (Fla. 3d DCA December 10, 2014)

The defendant in a mortgage foreclosure appealed from an order denying her motion for attorney’s fees and costs. Before filing her initial brief, the appellant filed a motion for appellate attorney’s fees under Section 57.105, Florida Statutes, based upon … Click To Read Full Case Law Review...

TORTS: SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY: CITY’S FAILURE TO ENSURE THAT REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER PROVIDED ADEQUATE SECURITY FOR COMPLETION OF INFRASTRUCTURE; APPEALS: CERTIORARI: DENIAL OF SUMMARY JUDGMENT BASED ON SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY IS NOT REVIEWABLE BY CERTIORARI: SUPREME COURT ALLOWS CITY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF NEW RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE PROVIDING FOR NON-FINAL APPEAL OF DECISIONS DETERMINING, AS A MATTER OF LAW, ENTITLEMENT TO SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY

Case Decision Date: Reviewed by

Beach Community Bank v. City of Freeport, ___ So. 3d ___, 39 Fla. L. Weekly S687 (Fla. November 13, 2014)

A bank sued the city for “fail[ing] to ensure a real estate developer posted an adequate security for completion of the infrastructure” on a construction project.  The trial court denied the city’s motion to dismiss based on sovereign immunity, but … Click To Read Full Case Law Review...