Seller’s Remorse can have Consequences, Particularly when the Seller Acts in Bad Faith

Seller’s Remorse? We all have experienced buyer’s remorse in some fashion, but what about seller’s remorse? Perhaps talked about less than buyer’s remorse, but sellers can have regrets too. This, however, does not mean that a seller’s remorse can go consequence-free, particularly when the seller backs out of a deal or sabotages the deal because of seller’s remorse. For instance, what if a seller of real property signs a deal to sell her property and then realizes she could have gotten some more money for the same property? Can she simply back out of the deal or proactively prevent certain...

21 May

0 Comments

Sticky

Motion for Summary Judgment – No Genuine Issue of Material Fact

Posted by David Adelstein

in Trial Perspectives

A motion for summary judgment is a dispositive motion that is popularly filed before trial. However, it is a motion that is denied far more than it is granted because of the burden imposed on the party moving for summary judgment in order to prevail on the motion. “Summary judgment is appropriate ‘if the pleadings, depositions, answers to interrogatories, admissions, affidavits, and other materials as would be admissible in evidence on file show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.’” Lin v....

29 January

0 Comments

Sticky

You Cannot Contradict Testimony with Affidavit Testimony in Response to Summary Judgment

Posted by David Adelstein

in Appeal, Expert Testimony

Preparing expert witnesses for deposition is vital. To this end, working with an expert witness to ensure their expert opinions fit within the context and theme of your case and burden of proof is equally vital. Not doing so can be fatal to your case. This can lead to unprepared testimony or opinions that may appear innocuous but are in fact detrimental to your claims. For example, in the recent opinion in Lesnik v. Duval Ford, LLC, 41 Fla.L.Weekly D281a (Fla. 1st DCA 2016), the plaintiff’s expert witness was deposed. The case involved a single vehicle accident where the plaintiff asserted claims...

31 December

0 Comments

Sticky

Summary Judgment Must be Based on Admissible Evidence

Posted by David Adelstein

in Evidence

A party moving for summary judgment must rely on admissible evidence in the record. Arlen Realty, Inc. v. Penn Mut. Life Ins. Co., 386 So.2d 886 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Parties oftentimes submit an affidavit in support of a motion for summary judgment in order to get certain testimony or documentary evidence into the record. When a party submits an affidavit to get a document into the record, the party still needs to authenticate the document and lay its foundation in the affidavit. See Alavi v. Garcia, 140 So.3d 1141 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014) (party required to lay foundation for...

04 December

0 Comments

Sticky

Inadmissible Testimony / Evidence Should Not be Considered on a Summary Judgment

Posted by David Adelstein

in Depositions

Speculative and inadmissible testimony should not be considered on a summary judgment. This point is illustrated in the wrongful death case of Panzera v. O’Neal, 40 Fla. L. Weekly D2661a (Fla. 2d DCA 2015). In this case, the undisputed evidence was that the decedent, wearing a dark colored shirt, was killed trying to cross an interstate at 3am. He was killed by a semi tractor-trailer driving under the speed limit that tried to avoid the accident. The Florida Highway Patrol responded to the accident and reported that the decedent caused the accident and the driver of the semi could have...

14 December

0 Comments

Sticky

De Novo Appellate Standard Of Review For Summary Judgments

Posted by David Adelstein

in Appeal, Standard of Review

An appellate court’s standard of review when reviewing a trial court’s summary judgment is de novo. Volusia County v. Aberdeen at Ormond Beach, L.P., 760 So.2d 126 (Fla. 2000); accord L’Etoile Homeowners Ass’n, Inc. v. Fresolone, 940 So.2d 1170 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). A de novo standard of review means that the appellate court will examine the trial court’s record anew and will rule on the record evidence and law without giving any deference to the trial court. This is a favorable standard of review for an appellant (party appealing trial court’s ruling) because there is no deference afforded to the...