THESE ARE NOT ALL OF THE CASES RELEASED BY THE COURTS FOR THE WEEK.
To see others not presented here, log in for more comprehensive weekly listings.

Attorney's fees -- Charging lien -- Enforcement -- Non-parties -- Financial institution -- Trial court did not err in denying law firm's motion to add bank to action to enforce charging lien against former client whom firm represented in dissolution of marriage proceedings -- Trial court properly determined that it would be inequitable to impose liability on bank where bank had no interest in dissolution action and was not involved in obtaining or participating in settlement of that action -- Notice of charging lien which did not disclose amount of fees owed or identify specific assets to which lien applied was insufficient basis for imposing charging lien liability against nonparty under common law
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Civil procedure -- Discovery -- Failure to comply with deadlines in case management order -- Sanctions -- Striking of pleadings -- Trial court erred in striking pleadings as sanction for plaintiff's failure to comply with deadlines in case management order -- Order striking pleadings is justified if it is found that party has violated numerous discovery orders or has shown deliberate and contumacious disregard of court's authority -- Plaintiff's request for extension of deadlines when faced with order compelling response to defendant's request for production did not amount to contumacious disregard of court order -- Prospective prejudice to opposing party if plaintiff's motion for extension was granted not basis for striking complaint -- Failure to comply with case management deadlines not grounds for ultimate sanction of striking party's pleadings -- Order striking pleadings reversed -- Default judgment vacated
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Contracts -- Real property sale -- Fraudulent inducement -- Attorney's fees -- Proposal for settlement -- Joint proposal -- Action alleging that seller had fraudulently induced buyers to purchase home by failing to disclose defect -- No error in denying prevailing seller's motion for attorney's fees pursuant to a rejected joint proposal for settlement she had served on both buyers where proposal did not apportion the settlement between the parties as required by rule 1.442 -- Language of rule directing that a “joint proposal must state the amount and terms attributable to each party” implements a substantive requirement of section 768.79 which mandates strict compliance -- Court rejects argument that no apportionment was necessary because buyers owned subject property as tenants by the entireties -- Apportionment under rule 1.442 is a bright line rule and there are no exceptions for claims brought by tenants by the entireties
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Costs -- Sanctions -- Justiciable issues -- Claim or defense not supported by material facts or applicable law -- Trial court erred by imposing sanctions against appellant in the form of costs pursuant to section 57.105(1) -- While statute authorizes an award of reasonable attorney's fees, it does not contemplate an award of costs
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Counties -- Public employees -- Whistle blowers -- Damages -- Noneconomic damages -- Sovereign immunity -- Jury's award of non-economic damages in action brought against county under Public Whistleblowers Act was barred as a matter of law -- Because county is entitled to sovereign immunity, plaintiff's recovery was limited to those damages expressly waived under the Act -- Act does not expressly and unequivocally waive sovereign immunity for non-economic damages
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Creditors' rights -- Garnishment -- Exemptions -- Homestead -- Reverse mortgage line of credit -- Trial court did not err by refusing to order homeowner to immediately access and distribute funds from a reverse mortgage line of credit to judgment creditor -- Unaccessed funds in the reverse mortgage line of credit retained their homestead protection where funds are accessible only when requested by the homeowner, and whether the homeowner draws on the remaining funds is a mere contingency that has not yet occurred and may never occur -- A homeowner cannot be compelled to borrow funds from a line of credit -- If homeowner withdraws funds from the line of credit in the future, those funds could be subject to garnishment, depending on the intended use of the funds
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Sexually violent predators -- Civil commitment under Jimmy Ryce Act -- Civil procedure -- Summary judgment -- Constitutionality -- Due process -- Right to trial by jury -- Use of summary judgment procedure in Ryce Act proceedings does not vitiate safeguards built into the involuntary civil commitment framework -- Trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of state in instant case where respondent did not present competent evidence establishing the existence of at least one fact issue that was both genuine and material -- Respondent's reliance solely on his one-word denial in his response to state's request for admissions that he suffered from requisite mental abnormality or personality disorder was not sufficient
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Insurance -- Personal injury protection -- Coverage -- Action seeking coverage for treatments plaintiff provided to insured after she was involved in car accident while a passenger in an uninsured vehicle which was titled in her husband's name only -- Policy exclusion providing that coverage would not apply to “you” while occupying a motor vehicle “owned” by “you” -- Trial court erred by denying insurer's motion for summary judgment based on conclusion that policy exclusion did not apply because insured was not legal title owner of subject vehicle -- Exclusion applied where insured lived with her husband and term “you” in policy was expressly defined as the person named and identified on the declarations page, including the spouse if a resident in the same household -- Court rejects argument that judgment in provider's favor should be affirmed because insurer failed to demonstrate that insured intentionally removed vehicle from the policy prior to accident -- Nothing in policy or section 627.736(2)(a) imposes a requirement that insurer demonstrate insured intentionally removed the vehicle from the policy before the policy's exclusion provision is triggered -- It is enough that subject vehicle was owned by insured's husband with whom she resided, was not listed on the declarations page, and that no premium was charged for such coverage
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Limited liability companies -- Direct/derivative action -- Counsel -- Disqualification -- Conflict of interest -- Hearing -- Witnesses -- Disclosure -- Direct and derivative claims brought by owner against LLC and co-owners -- At an evidentiary hearing on a motion to disqualify plaintiff owner's law firm based on alleged conflict of interest arising from work firm's attorney had performed for defendants while employed with a prior firm, trial court abused its discretion by not allowing an attorney from prior firm to testify because he was not disclosed on defendants' witness list -- Attorney from prior firm should have been permitted to testify where his testimony was critical to determining whether attorney at plaintiff's current firm acquired knowledge of the very dispute now in litigation, and there was no finding that admission of testimony would have resulted in any kind of prejudice -- In addition to the absence of prejudice, remaining Binger factors also weigh in favor of finding that exclusion of testimony was an abuse of discretion where current firm had included attorney on its own witness list and was well aware of the scope of his testimony; there was no evidence that the failure to include attorney on defendants' witness list was done intentionally or in bad faith; and there was no trial being disrupted
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Real property -- Easements -- Drainage -- Prescriptive easement -- Adverse use -- In finding that defendant had a prescriptive easement for a drainage pipe on plaintiff's property, trial court erred by placing burden on plaintiff to prove that drainage pipe had been used with plaintiff's permission -- Use of another's property is presumed to be with owner's permission -- Burden was on defendant to show, by clear and positive proof, that use of drainage pipe had been adverse to plaintiff -- Even in the face of long-term, open, and continuous use by defendant and its predecessors in interest, defendant must still establish adversity, which it failed to do -- Trial court further erred in concluding that defendant's use of pipe was consistent with its drainage rights as the upland property owner where it appears that trial court relied on the “reasonable use rule,” which was inapplicable in instant action because properties at issue are not adjoining
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Real property -- Homeowners associations -- Outbuildings -- Noncompliance with governing documents -- Exemptions -- Indian tribes -- Chickees -- Action for injunctive relief seeking to compel property owners to remove a chickee hut that had been built on their property without prior approval from association -- Trial court erred by granting judgment in favor of property owners based on determination that structure was exempt from private covenant enforcement under section 553.73, which allows Native American tribes to erect chickee huts without building permits -- Structure did not meet statute's definition of a “chickee” because structure contained non-wood materials and electric wiring -- Furthermore, statute only exempts chickees from the building code and does not apply to private deed restrictions -- Trial court further erred in concluding that association unreasonably denied the property owners' request for retroactive permission to build structure after it wrongly shifted burden to association to explain why structure was denied -- Once property owner conceded that he did not obtain approval prior to building, association was entitled to strong presumption of validity which property owners had to overcome with evidence proving enforcement was unreasonable and arbitrary
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Torts -- Attorney's fees -- Proposal for settlement -- Validity -- Nonmonetary terms -- Provision of proposal stating “it is contemplated that” a named non-party insurer “shall pay” plaintiffs on defendant's behalf -- Trial court erred by denying defendant's motion for attorney's fees based on rejected proposal for settlement -- Provision of proposal was not an impermissible nonmonetary term -- A provision in a proposal for settlement identifying who will pay a settlement sum is a monetary, rather than nonmonetary, term -- Ambiguity -- Naming insurer as payor of settlement funds did not create ambiguity -- No authority states a proposal for settlement requires a party to make the payment rather than a party's insurer -- When read as a whole, use of word “contemplated” did not render proposal ambiguous -- Impossible conditions -- Reference to insurer paying on defendant's behalf without establishing insurer's agreement to pay did not create an impossible condition precluding plaintiff from being able to properly evaluate proposal
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Workers' compensation -- Medical benefits -- Limitation of actions -- Tolling of period -- Judge of compensation claims erred by dismissing, on statute of limitations grounds, a petition for benefits which was filed more than two years after accident and more than a year after furnishing of last compensation benefit -- Discussion of the 1994 revisions to section 440.19, the two-year statute of limitations regime provided by subsection (1), the one-year tolling regime provided by subsection (2), and the meaning of the term “toll” -- Plain meaning of “toll” in section 440.19(2) means suspend, stop temporarily, or abate the limitations period set forth in subsection (1) -- In so holding, appellate court recedes from prior precedent holding that tolling merely extended the period to file additional claims -- Under § 440.19, the two-year limitations-period clock, which begins to run after an employee knows or should have known of a qualifying workplace injury, is stopped if an employer/carrier provides benefits after the injury -- Once E/C provides benefits after the injury, the one-year tolling clock begins running and restarts after every subsequent provision of a benefit -- Limitations-period clock restarts again one year after provision of last benefit -- In instant action, employee's petition fell squarely within running of two-year limitations period where E/C's provision of benefits two days after employee's workplace accident had stopped the running of the limitations-period clock until E/C's provision of the last benefit, which had occurred less than two years before instant petition was filed -- No evidence supports contention that petition seeks benefits for an injury that differed from the injury that was already accepted by E/C -- Waiver -- Election of remedies -- Court rejects argument that, by requesting to bifurcate merits hearing, claimant had stipulated that her petition raised an issue of compensability, which in turn precluded application and analysis of the tolling provision of section 440.19(2) -- Order of dismissal is set aside
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal Law Headnotes (Jump to Civil Law Headnotes)

THESE ARE NOT ALL OF THE CASES RELEASED BY THE COURTS FOR THE WEEK.
To see others not presented here, log in for more comprehensive weekly listings.

Criminal law -- Animal cruelty -- Confinement of animals with insufficient water, air, or exercise -- Restitution -- Costs -- County animal services agency was not direct victim of defendant's offenses and, accordingly, was not entitled to restitution under section 775.089(1) -- Trial court erred in imposing investigative costs in absence of request by state
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Plea -- Sentencing -- Evidence -- Appeals -- Jurisdiction -- Trial court did not err by not allowing defendant, who had pled guilty, to present his full statement and mitigating evidence prior to imposition of sentence -- District court has authority to review alleged error -- Rule 9.140(b)(2)(A)(ii)e, which allows appeals “as otherwise provided by law,” is broad enough to encompass a direct appeal alleging an error in the sentencing process, provided the error is properly preserved and the right to appeal has not been otherwise waived or forfeited -- Although rule 3.720(b) mandates a court to entertain submissions and evidence by the parties that are relevant to the sentence, evidence defendant was attempting to present was not relevant to his sentence where sole purpose for his submission of argument and testimony was to appeal to state to move for a downward departure based on substantial compliance
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Possession of electric weapon or device by convicted felon -- Non-operable device -- No error in denying motion for judgment of acquittal alleging that state failed to prove taser found in defendant's possession was operable -- Applicable statute contains no requirement that the weapon or device be operable -- Taser qualifies as an “electronic weapon or device” if it is simply designed to be used for defensive purposes through application or use of electrical current
VIEW OPINION (login required)

Criminal law -- Sexually violent predators -- Civil commitment under Jimmy Ryce Act -- Civil procedure -- Summary judgment -- Constitutionality -- Due process -- Right to trial by jury -- Use of summary judgment procedure in Ryce Act proceedings does not vitiate safeguards built into the involuntary civil commitment framework -- Trial court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of state in instant case where respondent did not present competent evidence establishing the existence of at least one fact issue that was both genuine and material -- Respondent's reliance solely on his one-word denial in his response to state's request for admissions that he suffered from requisite mental abnormality or personality disorder was not sufficient
VIEW OPINION (login required)