Trial court erred by entering a summary judgment dismissing a complaint for conversion because it adequately pled all the essential elements and the defendant allegedly refused plaintiff’s demand to return the property used as collateral and because plaintiff was not limited to seeking recourse through replevin. Beach Community Bank v. Disposal Services, LLC, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2185 (Fla. 1st DCA Sept. 21, 2016).
In tobacco litigation case, trial court abused its discretion in denying defendant’s motion for new trial because “plaintiff’s counsel’s opening statement was overly argumentative and included comments chastising the tobacco companies for their failure to apologize” and because the “closing argument included inflammatory remarks, statement evoking sympathy from the jury; inappropriate religious references; comments about the defendants not taking responsibility; attacks for electing to defend the case; and insinuations regarding the failure of the defendants’ corporate representatives to attend the trial.” R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Calloway, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2188 (Fla. 4th DCA Sept. 23, 2016).
In tobacco litigation case, trial court erred by failing to reduce the compensatory damage based on the jury’s finding that the plaintiff was 20.55 comparatively negligent even though the complaint included counts for intentional fraud because all the claims were based on products liability theory. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Calloway, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2188 (Fla. 4th DCA Sept. 23, 2016).
In a negligence case involving death of a motorcyclist against an establishment that served alcohol to the motorist who caused the accident, the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of the establishment’s charitable work and instructing the jury on the Responsible Vendor Act, sections 561.701-06, Florida Statutes because that statute does not create a cause of action and does not impose a legal duties or obligations. Okeechobee Aerie 4137, Fraternal Order of Eagles, Inc. v. Wilde, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D1783 41 Fla. L. Weekly D1783 (Fla. 4th DCA Aug. 3, 2016).
In wrongful death action for negligence and strict liability for failure to warn and the manufacture of a defective product, trial court erred by rejecting plaintiff’s request that standard jury instruction PL 5 (the “consumer expectations test”) be given. Font v. Union Carbide Corp., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D1721 (Fla. 3d DCA July 27, 2016).
In defamation per se suit, trial court neither departed from essential requirements of law granting leave to amend complaint to seek punitive damages because there was no evidence nor finding by the court that the defendant acted intentionally or with gross negligence. Tilton v. Wrobel, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D1737 (Fla. 4th DCA July 27, 2016).
In automobile accident case, appellate court affirmed trial judge’s granting a motion for new trial, but because it was unclear as to the scope, remanded with instructions that the new trial should be on the issue of comparative liability only (since there was evidence the plaintiff who collided with a parked truck had poor eyesight), but the finding the defendant was liable and the damages award should not be disturbed. Botta v. Florida Power & Light Co., 41 Fla. D1744 (Fla. 4th DCA July 27, 2016).
“[S]ection 409.910(11) (f) of Florida’s Medicaid Third-Party Act . . . is not preempted by the anti-lien provision of federal Medicaid law in wrongful death actions.” Goheagan v. Estate of Molly Swaby, 197 So.3d 112 (Fla. 4th DCA July 20, 2016).
Trial court properly dismissed wrongful death action brought against s mental facility and its attending physician because allegations that defendants used “false” documents which allowed voluntary dismissal were essentially challenging the psychiatrist’s evaluation that decedent was competent to consent which in essence a claim for medical malpractice and plaintiff failed to comply with the presuit requirements of Chapter 766. Haslett v. Broward Health Imperial Point Medical Center, 197 So.3d 124 (Fla. 4th DCA July 20, 2016).
Trial court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing complaint against Home Depot alleging plaintiff was injured when a fire extinguisher fell and hit her neck and shoulder with prejudice as being a fraud on the court because there was medical evidence plaintiff had visited an emergency room seven months before incident complaining of neck and shoulder pain and that eight months after the incident plaintiff was involved in a serious automobile accident. Diaz v. Home Depot, USA, 196 So.3d 504 (Fla. 3d DCA July 13, 2016).