01 September

Sticky

Apex Doctrine to Prevent Deposition of High Ranking Official in Corporate Context

There is a doctrine referred to as the Apex doctrine to prevent the deposition of a high ranking official. The Apex doctrine stands for the proposition that “[an] agency head should not be subject to deposition, over objection, unless and until the opposing parties have exhausted other discovery and can demonstrate that the agency head is uniquely able to provide relevant information which cannot be obtained from other sources.” Suzuki Motor Corp. v. Winckler, 44 Fla.L.Weekly D2219a (Fla. 1stDCA 2019) (citation omitted). Stated another way: “[A] party seeking to depose a . . . high-ranking governmental official must demonstrate the personal involvement of the official in a material...

24 August

0 Comments

Sticky

Comply with the Dispute Resolution Provision in Your Contract

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

Many contracts have dispute resolution provisions. If not, they should. It is important that dispute resolution provisions are reviewed and complied with PRIOR TO the initiation of a dispute. Failure to comply could result in you being “S*** Out of Luck” with your claim, as exemplified in the recent opinion in Guan v. Ellingsworth Residential Community Association, Inc., 44 Fla. L. Weekly D2155a (Fla. 5thDCA 2019). This case involved a dispute between a homeowner and her homeowner’s association. There was a Declaration of Covenants recorded in the public records. The Declaration, no different than any Declaration, created a contract between a...

21 August

0 Comments

Sticky

Condominium Unit Owner Suing Condominium Unit Owner under Florida’s Condominium Act

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

If you are a condominium unit owner, you might find this to be of interest. If you are not a condominium unit owner, you likely will not. In a recent case, an issue was whether a particular provision of the Florida Condominium Act provided a private cause of action between unit owners. Stated differently, the issue was whether one owner could sue another owner for a statutory violation. The appellate court held it did not: “Nothing in the language of this [particular] statute or in the statutory structure indicates that a private cause of action between unit owners was contemplated by...

18 August

0 Comments

Sticky

Standard for Petition for Writ of Certiorari

Posted by David Adelstein

in Appeal

To invoke an appellate court's certiorari jurisdiction, [t]he petitioning party must demonstrate that the contested order constitutes (1) a departure from the essential requirements of the law, (2) resulting in material injury for the remainder of the case[,] (3) that cannot be corrected on post-judgment appeal. State Farm Florida Ins. Co. v. Sanders, 44 Fla.L.Weekly D1901a (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) quoting Rousso v. Hannon, 146 So.3d 66, 69 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014) (internal quotations omitted). This is the standard for a petition for writ of certiorari. An example of an appellate court granting a petition for writ of certiorari and quashing a trial court’s...

10 August

0 Comments

Sticky

Supplemental Property Insurance Claim

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

In a recent property insurance dispute, Chavez v. Tower Hill Insurance Company, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D2019b (Fla. 3d DCA 2019), an insured previously sued his property insurer and lost. The insured then filed a new suit against his property insurer for the same damages. The trial court, affirmed by the appellate court, held that res judicata applied to bar the insured’s new lawsuit against the insurer. The insured tried to argue that res judicata should not apply because the new lawsuit was predicated on a supplemental claim, as there is law that res judicata does not apply if the...

28 July

0 Comments

Sticky

Delay Tactics may Not Work to Avoid Dispositive Summary Judgment Ruling

Posted by David Adelstein

in Discovery, Trial Perspectives

Delay tactics do not always work to avoid a dispositive summary judgment ruling, particularly when the tactics have no justifiable basis. And, frankly, delay tactics should not work as an intentional means to delay the inevitable. This was discovered by a commercial condominium owner in Weisser Realty Group, Inc. v. Porto Vita Property Owners Association, Inc., 44 Fla. L. Weekly D1094a (Fla. 3d DCA 2019), where the trial court granted a foreclosure summary judgment against it. In this case, a commercial condominium owner purchased a condominium unit in a condominium that had residential units and select commercial units. Residential units...

27 July

0 Comments

Sticky

Damages Under Florida’s Public Whistleblower Act

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

In a prior article, I discussed damages recoverable under Florida’s Whistleblower Act, which concerns employees working for private employers. An employer cannot retaliate against an employee for reporting or objecting to violations of laws, rules, and regulations. But, Florida also has a Whistleblower Act concerning employees or independent contractors working for public employers. This is embodied in Florida Statute s. 112.3187 (also known as Florida’s Public Whistleblower Act) and designed to prevent the retaliation against such persons that report to an appropriate agency violations of law or any person that discloses information to an appropriate agency regarding the gross waste of...

20 July

0 Comments

Sticky

Damages Under Florida’s Whistleblower Act

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

Florida’s Whistleblower Act is designed to protect an employee who is wrongfully retaliated against (i.e., suspended, terminated, demoted, etc.) for objecting to or refusing to participate in his or her employer’s illegal practices. Aery v. Wallace Lincoln-Mercury, LLC, 118 So.3d 904, 912 (Fla. 4thDCA 2013) (citation and quotation omitted). This is set forth in Florida Statute s. 448.102. If you believe you have been retaliated against for threatening to blow the whistle (or refusing to participate and objecting to your employer’s illegal activities), it is important to consult with counsel immediately to ensure your rights are protected. Also, if you believe...

14 July

0 Comments

Sticky

What is a Covenant Running with the Land?

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

What is a covenant running with the land? A recent case explains the difference between a covenant running with the land and a personal covenant that does not run with the land: “Covenants are loosely defined as ‘promises in conveyances or other instruments pertaining to real estate' . . . [and] are divided into two categories, real and personal.” A real covenant, or covenant running with the land, “differs from a merely personal covenant in that the former concerns the property conveyed and the occupation and enjoyment thereof, whereas the latter covenant is collateral or is not immediately concerned with the...

13 July

0 Comments

Sticky

Pre-Suit Notice Condition Precedent Requirement before Suing News Media for Defamation Not Extended to Books and Movies

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

Florida Statute s. 770.01 contains a pre-suit notice condition precedent requirement before a person can sue the news media for defamation. It provides: Before any civil action is brought for publication or broadcast, in a newspaper, periodical, or other medium, of a libel or slander, the plaintiff shall, at least 5 days before instituting such action, serve notice in writing on the defendant, specifying the article or broadcast and the statements therein which he or she alleges to be false and defamatory. In a recent opinion, Mazur v. Baraya, 44 Fla. L. Weekly D1795b (Fla. 2d DCA 2019), the issue was whether...