31 March

Sticky

Home Venue Privilege Applies to Government Defendants

“Governmental defendants in Florida are entitled, absent waiver or exception, to “home venue privilege,” i.e., to be sued in the county where their headquarters are located.” Florida Pace Funding Agency v. Pinellas County, 49 Fla.L.Weekly 660a (Fla. 2d DCA 2024). This home venue privilege is important to governmental entities since it ensures they are sued in their home county, i.e., where their taxpayers and residents will serve on a jury. A remote exception to this home venue privilege is known as the sword wielder exception. The sword wielder exception allows a plaintiff to sue a government defendant outside of the home county...

24 March

0 Comments

Sticky

Election of Remedies Doctrine

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

A recent case out of Florida’s Third District Court of Appeals provides a worthy discussion of the election of remedies doctrine: The Florida Supreme Court has stated: The election of remedies doctrine is an application of the doctrine of estoppel and operates on the theory that a party electing one course of action should not later be allowed to avail himself of an incompatible course. The purpose of the doctrine is to prevent a double recovery for the same wrong. Under Florida law, however, the election of remedies doctrine applies only where the remedies in question are coexistent and inconsistent. . ....

17 March

0 Comments

Sticky

Enforceable Settlement Does Not Need to be Signed and can be Agreed by Attorneys

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

“To be enforceable, an agreement must be sufficiently specific, and reflect assent by the parties to all essential terms. . . . Where essential terms of an agreement remain open, subject to future negotiation, there can be no enforceable contract.” Portner v. Koppel, 49 Fla.L.Weekly D599a (Fla. 4th DCA 2024) (citation and quotation omitted). This applies to settlement agreements that are governed under contract law principles. Portner, supra. “Emails between attorneys can constitute an enforceable settlement agreement.” Id. Sometimes, a party may have “buyer’s remorse” and refuse to sign a settlement agreement. This fact alone does NOT mean there is not a...

10 March

0 Comments

Sticky

Personal Jurisdiction’s Two Prong Inquiry

Posted by David Adelstein

in Appeal, Trial Perspectives

If you are suing a nonresident defendant, i.e., you are NOT located in Florida, this two-step inquiry to determine whether Florida courts have personal jurisdiction over you--the nonresident defendant--is important: Florida courts conduct a two-step inquiry to determine whether a court has personal jurisdiction over a nonresident defendant. First, it must be determined that the complaint alleges sufficient jurisdictional facts to bring the action within the ambit of the statute; and if it does, the next inquiry is whether sufficient “minimum contacts” are demonstrated to satisfy due process requirements. The first prong -- i.e., the statutory prong -- … is governed by Florida's...

03 March

0 Comments

Sticky

Take Time Crafting Your Verdict Form

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

Take time to properly craft YOUR special interrogatory verdict form. This is the verdict form that goes back with the jury to answer in rendering its verdict. The questions, instructions, and the order of the questions in the verdict form need to flow and make sense. In a recent property insurance coverage dispute, a jury rendered a verdict on a special interrogatory verdict form. The special interrogatory verdict form was, perhaps, not a model of perfection in asking the jury questions to answer. In answering the verdict form, the jury answered the 5th question “yes” that the insurer established that the damage...

07 January

0 Comments

Sticky

Attorney’s Fees only Flow to Plaintiff-Payee in Statutory Worthless Check Claim

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

Florida Statute s. 68.065 is Florida’s worthless check statute – it creates a statutory cause of action against the payor of the worthless check. It further provides a statutory basis for attorney’s fees to the plaintiff-payee that prevails on the worthless check claim. Fla.Stat. s. 68.065(6) (“Other provisions notwithstanding, the maker or drawer is liable to the payee for all attorney fees and collection costs incurred by payee as a result of the payee’s claim.”). Well, what if the payee loses and the defendant-payor prevails on the worthless check claim – does the defendant get attorney’s fees? This was the...

25 November

0 Comments

Sticky

Introduce the Right Circumstantial Evidence for Purposes of “Admission by Party Opponent” Hearsay Exception

Posted by David Adelstein

in Evidence, Trial Perspectives

One of the exceptions to hearsay is known as an admission by a party opponent. In Florida, this hearsay exception is included in Florida Statute s. 90.803(18): (18) ADMISSIONS.—A statement that is offered against a party and is: (a) The party’s own statement in either an individual or a representative capacity; (b) A statement of which the party has manifested an adoption or belief in its truth; (c) A statement by a person specifically authorized by the party to make a statement concerning the subject; (d) A statement by the party’s agent or servant concerning a matter within the scope of the agency or employment thereof, made during the existence...

19 November

0 Comments

Sticky

Incorporated Documents (such as an Addendum) Need to be Identified as Incorporated

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

If you have a document you want incorporated into the contract, make sure the contract specifically identifies the incorporated document. Otherwise, that document will NOT form the basis of your contract and if that document is not executed, it will NOT affect the enforceability of your contract. By way of example, in Mercado v. Sridhar, 48 Fla.L.Weekly D2188a (Fla. 3d DCA 2023), a buyer and seller entered into a purchase-and-sale contract. The issue was an addendum relating to the seller’s furnishings and a leaseback option that was never executed. The buyer sued the seller for specific performance when the seller refused...

12 November

0 Comments

Sticky

Accord and Satisfaction requires Good Faith Conduct

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

The party asserting accord and satisfaction must prove that “the amount of the claim was unliquidated or subject to a bona fide dispute.” [See Florida’s Uniform Commercial Code, § 673.3111(1).] The dispute cannot arise after the party seeking accord and satisfaction tenders the payment instrument intended to satisfy or discharge the debt. *** The party seeking accord and satisfaction must also tender the instrument in good faith. Because Florida caselaw regarding good faith in an accord and satisfaction context is relatively undeveloped, court decisions in other states with similar accord and satisfaction statutes are instructive. *** “Accord and satisfaction is something that must be...

29 October

0 Comments

Sticky

Rescission of Contract based on Mutual Mistake

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

To state a cause of action for rescission of a contract, a plaintiff must include the following elements in the complaint: (1) The character or relationship of the parties; (2) The making of the contract; (3) The existence of fraud, mutual mistake, false representations, impossibility of performance, or other ground for rescission or cancellation; (4) That the party seeking rescission has rescinded the contract and notified the other party to the contract of such rescission. (5) If the moving party has received benefits from the contract, he should further allege an offer to restore these benefits to the party furnishing them, if restoration is possible; (6) Lastly,...