Category: Uncategorized

Case Summaries May 5 and 12

These are summaries of the Florida District Courts of Appeal and the Florida Supreme Court’s decisions reported in the May 5 and 12, 2017, editions of the Florida Law Weekly concerning real estate law. The links take you directly to the appellate courts’ websites for the original, unpublished opinions.

AGENTS AND BROKERS

Trial court erred by entering a final summary judgment dismissing a vicarious liability claim against real estate broker on basis wrongful acts were committed by real estate agent because the broker’s “receipt of commissions on the alleged wrongful real estate deals, as well as it possible knowledge that [agent] was wrongfully using Appellant’s funds to purchase real estate, raised issues of fact precluding summary judgment.” Trevarthen v. Wilson, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D1004 (Fla. 4th DCA Feb. 5, 2013).

APPELLATE

Circuit court sitting in its appellate capacity departed from the essential requirements of law by agreeing with applicants for a variance from an ordinance governing fences on basis there was no competent substantial evidence supporting the Board of Adjustment’s denial because the order was based on incorrect law as the burden of proof was on the applicants to prove they were entitled to a variance. City of Satellite Beach v. Goersch, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D959 (Fla. 5th DCA April 28, 2017).

ATTORNEYS AND ATTORNEYS’ FEES

Trial court erred in awarding attorney’s fees in favor of condominium association against unit owners because the court had appointed a successor receiver, which was substantially the relief the Owners had sought and was more favorable than the arbitration award the association was granted. Gonzalez v. International Park Condominium I Association, Inc., 42 Fla. L. Weekly D956 (Fla. 3d DCA April 26, 2017).

CIVIL PROCEDURE

In mortgage foreclosure action, trial court erred in denying motion to quash service of process because the filing of a motion for protective order and request for sanctions did not constitute the type of affirmative relief that amounts to submission to the trial court’s jurisdiction. Bornstein v. Bank of New York Mellon, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D1009 (Fla. 4th DCA May 3, 2017).

Trial court abused its discretion by dismissing a commercial tenant’s verified amended complaint against condominium association alleging breach of contract, specific performance, tortious interference with its business and contractual relationship with its landlord, invasion of privacy, and negligent misrepresentation with prejudice because the counts for breach of contract and tortious interference with a business and contractual relationship could be amended to state causes of action. DNA Sports Performance Lab, Inc. v. Club Atlantis Condominium Association, Inc., 42 Fla. L. Weekly D943 (Fla. 3d DCA April 26, 2017).

CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION

Trial court properly dismissed property owners association’s declaratory action as to whether short-term vacation rentals violates covenants restricting the properties’ use to residential purposes only because there was no explicit language limiting the length of the use. Santa Monica Beach Property Owners Association, Inc. v. Acord, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D984 (Fla. 1st DCA April 28, 2017).

CONTRACT LAW

“Florida recognizes oral cohabitation agreements between unmarried parties.” Armao v. McKenney, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D1011 (Fla. 4th DCA May 3, 2017).

In commercial foreclosure action, trial court “erred in finding that Borrower committed a technical breach as compliance with the financial covenants was not required at the time of the alleged breach.” Summitbridge Credit Investments III, LLC v. Carlyle Beach, LLC, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D1014 (Fla. 4th DCA May 3, 2017).

EMINENT DOMAIN

In inverse condemnation case, trial court properly granted summary judgment of dismissal because county’s conditioning permit for development of a subdivision on the installation of a reclaimed water use system did not constitute a taking as there was “a clear nexus between the legitimate state interest in conserving water and the permit conditions imposed by the County requiring the use of reclaimed water in the subdivision.” Highlands-In-The-Woods, L.L.C. v. Polk County, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D969 (Fla. 2d DCA April 28, 2017).

GOVERNMENT

Trial court erred by entering a final summary judgment dismissing claims seeking declaratory relief as to whether a road became a county road per section 94.361(2), Florida Statutes, because that section, unlike common-law dedication or dedication per section 94.361(1), Florida Statutes does not require acceptance. Mathers v. Wakulla County, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D995 (Fla. 1st DCA May 2, 2017).

MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE

In mortgage foreclosure action in which parties agreed final judgment should be reversed as trial evidence was legally insufficient to establish the amount awarded, appellate court held that remand for further proceedings instead of ordering a dismissal is the appropriate remedy because the bank had shown some evidence of damages. Evans v. HSBC Bank, USA, N.A., 42 Fla. L. Weekly D1033 (Fla. 2d DCA May 5, 2017).

Trial court erred by entering a final judgment of mortgage foreclosure because it “ended the trial without allowing [borrowers’] due process rights when it ended the trial without allowing them to present evidence in their defense.” Dobson v. U.S. Bank N.A., 42 Fla. L. Weekly D962 (Fla. 5th DCA April 28, 2017).

On motion for rehearing of a mortgage foreclosure action, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed the trial court’s dismissal because the Bank’s the pooling and servicing agreement coupled with the note endorsed in blank constituted sufficient evidence that the Bank had standing at the inception of the lawsuit. HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v. Alejandre, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D941 (Fla. 4th DCA April 26, 2017).

Trial court erred by involuntarily dismissing mortgage foreclosure action due to Bank’s lack of standing because the Bank’s mortgage servicer submitted into evidence an original note endorsed in blank which was identical to the copy attached to the complaint and because there was evidence and testimony that the servicer was acting on behalf of the Bank. Bank of New York Mellon v. Heath, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D940 (Fla. 4th DCA April 26, 2017).

On rehearing of a mortgage foreclosure action, the Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court’s order denying the bank’s claim for surplus funds on the basis the motion was untimely filed and certified its decision to be in conflict with Straub v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 182 So. 3d 878 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016). Bank of New York Mellon v. Glenville, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D934 (Fla. 2d DCA April 26, 2017).

PARTITION

In partition of real property action, trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining an award of partition credits because payments of mortgage and living expenses were paid from accounts containing comingled funds. Armao v. McKenney, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D1011 (Fla. 4th DCA May 3, 2017).

TORT

Trial court erred by entering a final summary judgment dismissing a vicarious liability claim against real estate broker on basis wrongful acts were committed by real estate agent because the broker’s “receipt of commissions on the alleged wrongful real estate deals, as well as it possible knowledge that [agent] was wrongfully using Appellant’s funds to purchase real estate, raised issues of fact precluding summary judgment.” Trevarthen v. Wilson, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D1004 (Fla. 4th DCA Feb. 5, 2013).

COPYRIGHT 2017 RANDALL O. REDER. If you have any comments or suggestions, please contact Randall Reder at (813) 960-1952 or at reder@redersdigest.com.

Weekly Reder for December 9, 2016

These are summaries of the Florida District Courts of Appeal and the Florida Supreme Court’s decisions reported in the December 9, 2016, edition of the Florida Law Weekly.  The links take you directly to the appellate courts’ websites for the original, unpublished opinions.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE

 

 

APPELLATE

 

In mortgage foreclosure action, appellate court issued writ of prohibition to prevent trial court from compelling deposition of bank’s corporate representative because bank had voluntarily dismissed the case within the safe harbor period of section 57.104(4), Florida Statutes.  Bank of America, N.A. v. Turkanovic, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2689 (Fla. 1st DCA Dec. 1, 2016).

 

Appellate court denied petition for writ of certiorari to quash a non-final order disqualifying petitioner’s counsel although there was irreparable harm because the trial court held a hearing and made findings so there was no departure from the essential requirements of law.  Chessler v. All American Semiconductor, Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2680 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 30, 2016).

 

In a dismissal of an appeal of a mortgage foreclosure judgment, Bank was not entitled to an award for attorney’s fees because it sought fees as a sanction per section 57.105, Florida Statutes, yet fails to comply with the requirements of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.410(b).  Jarrette Bay Investments Corp. v. BankUnited, N.A., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2661 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 30, 2016).

 

ATTORNEYS AND ATTORNEYS’ FEES

 

In suit brought by homeowner’s association, trial court abused its discretion in denying property owner’s motion of attorney’s fees on basis there was no prevailing party because property owner prevailed on all the counts where homeowner’s association was seeking attorney’s fees under the restrictive covenants.  Olson v. Pickett Downs Unit IV Homeowner’s Association, Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2699 (Fla. 5th DCA Dec. 2, 2016).

 

In mortgage foreclosure action, trial court properly awarded attorney’s to the borrowers because even though the borrowers’ failed to plead entitle in their pro se answers, the bank was on notice they were requesting attorney’s fees when borrowers’ counsel pleaded for fees in a motion for judgment on the pleadings and a motion for summary judgment and the failed to object.  BankUnited, N.A, v. Ajabshir, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2685 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 30, 2016).

 

BUSINESS AND EMPLOYMENT

 

 

CIVIL PROCEDURE

 

 

COLLECTIONS

 

 

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

 

Hospitals have standing to challenge the constitutionality of Florida’s Neurological Injury Compensation Act.  Putnam Community Medical Center v. Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Ass’n., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2702 (Fla. 1st DCA Dec. 5, 2016).

 

Florida’s Neurological Injury Compensation Act which contains differing birth weight requirements in section 766.302(2), does not violate Florida’s constitutional right to equal protection because there is a rational basis for making a distinction between “single gestations” and “multiple gestations.”  Putnam Community Medical Center v. Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Ass’n., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2702 (Fla. 1st DCA Dec. 5, 2016).

 

 

CONSUMER PROTECTION

 

DISCOVERY AND EVIDENCE

 

 

 

ESTATE PLANNING, GUARDIANSHIP AND PROBATE

 

Trial court erred by dismissing beneficiary’s claim against trustee for breach of fiduciary duty on basis of  six month time requirement of section 736.1008(2), Florida Statutes, because although fact that loan was disclosed in the accounting because the accounting failed to disclose that the promissory note the trustee gave to the trust was worthless. Turkish v. Brody, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2681 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 30, 2016).

 

 

 

 

In applying New York law, trial court properly found that a Supplemental Release Agreement (SRA) between a trustee and IRS was invalid and unenforceable the terms of the agreement were not fully disclosed to one of the beneficiaries. Turkish v. Brody, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2681 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 30, 2016).

 

 

Trial court erred by entering a judgment against a trustee for breach of fiduciary duty because the trust specifically provided the trustee had “absolute discretion” to make distributions from the principal “in equal or unequal amounts and to either [beneficiary] to the exclusion of the other.”  Turkish v. Brody, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2681 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 30, 2016).

 

 

INSURANCE

 

Trial court erred by entering a final declaratory judgment following a jury trial finding there was coverage but ruling there was no proof of damages because the parties had stipulated at pretrial conference that the only issue was whether there was a theft of the truck.  S&M Transportation, Inc. v. Northland Ins. Co., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2696 (Fla. 5th DCA Dec. 2, 2016).

 

REAL PROPERTY

 

Trial court erred by entering a final judgment of mortgage foreclosure and denying borrower’s motion for involuntary dismissal because bank had failed to comply with HUD regulation requiring a face-to-face interview, which is a condition precedent.  Palma v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2694 (Fla. 5th DCA Dec. 2, 2016).

 

In a claim by a commercial tenant for constructive eviction, trial court did not abuse its discretion by allowing tenant to deposit rent money into the court registry because Rule of Civil Procedure 1.600 offers broad discretion in accepting or rejecting a voluntary deposit.  Tixie Designs, Inc. v. Green Ice, Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2679 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 30, 2016).

 

In mortgage foreclosure action, trial court erred by including in the amount of final judgment amounts for interest, late charges, taxes, insurance, inspection fees, court costs and attorney’s fees because there was no competent, substantial evidence supporting these amounts.  Tervil v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2678 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 30, 2016),

 

Trial court properly entered a final judgment of mortgage foreclosure despite borrower’s protestations that the signatures on the promissory note and mortgage were not hers because she had failed to raise these allegations as an affirmative defense and because the trial court, which allowed her to testify anyway, weighed her credibility in making its determination.  Polonsky v. HSBC Bank USA, N.A., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2664 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 30, 2016).

 

 

 

Trial court erred by entering final judgment of involuntary dismissal in a mortgage foreclosure case because the borrower’s expert witness’s testimony that the trust was not the holder of the note and therefore lacked standing were legal conclusions and because the borrowers lacked standing to challenge trust documents. Citibank, N.A. v. Olsak, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2658 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 30, 2016).

 

TORT

 

In tobacco litigation case, appellate affirmed the final judgment but reversed and remanded for remittitur because the jury’s award of $6 million in compensatory damages to an adult child living independently was excessive.  R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Odom, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2670 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 30, 2016).

 

The trial court erred by entering a final judgment against a nursing home for negligent supervision of an employee who was terminated for accepting gifts from one of its patients because there was no evidence that the nursing home knew of any propensity of the employee to take advantage of the patient and because there was no evidence that any of its other employees committed any tort. ACTS Retirement-Life Communities, Inc. v. Estate of Robert Zimmer Sr., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2668 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 30, 2016).

 

In dog bite case, trial court erred by entering a summary judgment determining as a matter of law that Plaintiff’s action constituted an intervening cause because Florida’s dog bite statute section 767.04, Florida Statute imposes strict liability on dog owners, subject only to a plaintiff’s comparative negligence, which in this case where the plaintiff was bitten by two dogs she had fed and sheltered while trying to locate their owner should be tried by a jury.  Arellano v. Broward K-9/Miami K-9 Services, Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2659 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 30, 2016).

 

 

 

COPYRIGHT 2017 RANDALL O. REDER.  If you have any comments or suggestions, please contact Randall Reder at (813) 960-1952 or at reder@redersdigest.com.

 

Florida Appellate Court Decisions – December 2, 2017

These are summaries of Florida Appellate court decisions reported in the December 2, 2016, edition of the Florida Law Weekly.  The links take you directly to the appellate courts’ websites for the original, unpublished opinions.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE

 

 

APPELLATE

 

Appellate court affirmed trial court’s award of post-judgment interest at the rate of 1.49% despite appellee’s argument was not entitled to any post-judgment interest because appellee agreed to the amount at trial and therefore could not cross-appeal this issue.  Futernick v. Trushina, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2642 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 23, 2016).

 

Appellate court affirmed final judgment, but remanded for a new trial on the interest rate the bank was entitled to because there was no testimony about the relevant LIBOR index and any of the change dates so the interest amount was not a simple ministerial function.  Gonzalez v. OneWest Bank, FSB, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2635 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 23, 2016).

 

Appellant failed to preserve issue of the trial court’s failure to retain jurisdiction to award attorney’s fees by not presenting the argument in her initial brief. Gooden v. City of Riviera Beach, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2630 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016).

 

Appellate court issued a writ of mandamus ordering trial court to hold an immediate hearing on a challenge to a candidate’s eligibility to run for office.  Jackson v. Leon County Elections Canvassing Board, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2623 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 22, 2016).

 

Appellate court denied petition for writ of prohibition because petitioner “failed to take appropriate and timely steps to seek our review of the order denying disqualification.”  Jackson v. Leon County Elections Canvassing Board, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2645 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 23, 2016).

 

Because of the unusual facts in the case, the appellate court exercised its authority under article V, section 4(b)(3) of the Florida Constitution to issue “other writs necessary to the complete exercise of [our] jurisdiction” to prevent an elected candidate for mayor from taking office pending a final judgment from the trial court on whether the candidate met the residency requirements for qualification.  Jackson v. Leon County Elections Canvassing Board, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2645 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 23, 2016).

 

 

ATTORNEYS AND ATTORNEYS’ FEES

 

Trial court erred in awarding law firm attorney’s fees against a former client because 1) the court erred by denying the former client his right to depose the corporate officers who were specifically identified in the notice of taking deposition and 2) the law firm failed to present any expert witness testimony with regard to the reasonableness of its fees.  Ghannam v. Mark D. Shelnutt, P.A., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2626 (Fla. 5th DCA June 17, 2016).

 

BUSINESS AND EMPLOYMENT

 

Trial court properly entered a final summary judgment in a breach of contract action brought by Florida Power and Light against Verizon for amounts owed for placing equipment on its poles because an Order issued by the Federal Communications Commission in 2011 stating rates had to “just and reasonable” was not applicable since Verizon unilaterally paid a reduced rate instead of filing a complaint with FCC.  Frontier Florida, LLC v. Florida Power & Light Co., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2640 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 23, 1016).

 

CIVIL PROCEDURE

 

In a dispute involving the extent of a tenant’s rights under a long-term lease, the trial court erred by entering a temporary injunction in order to maintain the status quo because it failed to make specific factual findings or require the posting of bond as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.610.  Aligned Bayshore Marina, LLC, v. American Watersports Coconut Grove, LLC, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2644 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 23, 2016).

 

Trial court erred by reversing itself on motion for rehearing because it considered an accountant’s excluded report in calculating damages thereby preventing the defense from submitting any contrary evidence.  Willson v. Big Lake Partners, LLC, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2631 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 23, 2016).

 

 

COLLECTIONS

 

 

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

 

 

CONSUMER PROTECTION

 

DISCOVERY AND EVIDENCE

 

Trial court erred in awarding law firm attorney’s fees against a former client because 1) the court erred by denying the former client his right to depose the corporate officers who were specifically identified in the notice of taking deposition and 2) the law firm failed to present any expert witness testimony with regard to the reasonableness of its fees.  Ghannam v. Mark D. Shelnutt, P.A., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2626 (Fla. 5th DCA June 17, 2016).

 

 

ESTATE PLANNING, GUARDIANSHIP AND PROBATE

 

 

INSURANCE

 

In a case involving the interpretation of an all-risks policy, The Florida Supreme Court explained that when two or more perils to cause  a loss and one is excluded the “courts have developed competing theories on how to determine coverage: the efficient proximate cause and concurring cause doctrines.”  The Court explained these doctrines and adopted the concurrent cause doctrine which “provides that coverage may exist where an insured risk constitutes a concurrent cause of the loss even when it is not the prime or efficient cause.”  Sebo v. American Home Assurance Co., Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly S582 (Fla. Dec. 1, 2016).

 

 

REAL PROPERTY

 

Trial court erred by entering a final deficiency summary judgment because there were factual issues raised by the borrowers’ affirmative defenses and counterclaim alleging wrongful withholding of insurance proceeds which were not waived by the borrowers in a loan modification agreement.  Rodriguez v. Ocean Bank, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2637 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 23, 2016).

 

Trial court properly ruled that Federal National Mortgage Association when it obtained title to a piece of real property through a foreclosure action was liable for the full amount of the unpaid homeowner association assessments and was not entitled to the one-year limitation per the “safe harbor” statute, section 720.3085(2)(c), Florida Statutes, which unambiguously states it applies when the homeowners association is “initially joined” in the foreclosure action.  Federal National Mortgage Association v. Mirabella at Mirasol Homeowners’ Association, Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2633 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 23, 2016).

 

 

TORT

 

 

 

 

COPYRIGHT 2017 RANDALL O. REDER.  If you have any comments or suggestions, please contact Randall Reder at (813) 960-1952 or at reder@redersdigest.com.

 

 

 

Case Summaries for week of Nov 18, 2016

These are summaries of cases reported in the November 18, 2016, edition of the Florida Law Weekly.  The links take you directly to the appellate courts’ websites for the original, unpublished opinions.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE

 

The administrative law judge erred by denying appellants’ motion for attorney’s fees, even though the judge ruled in favor of appellee as to amount of benefits that should be awarded, because section 766.31, Florida Statutes is not dependent upon prevailing party determination but compels payment of fees and costs incurred in connection with claim.  Lampert v. Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2549 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 14, 2016).

 

The Department of Environmental Protection properly dismissed a petition challenging the issuance of a five-year environmental resource permit because the petitioner, which was an island community occupying the central portion Key Biscayne, did not have third-party standing to challenge the permit approving installation of 830 temporary water slips to facilitate a week-end long boat show as it failed to allege actual injury in fact or an immediate threat of direct injury.  Village of Key Biscayne v. Dept. of Environmental Protection, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2503 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

APPELLATE

 

Appellate court dismissed appeal of the portion of an order that denied motion to sever or bifurcate as it was not an appealable non-final order recognized in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130 and denied certiorari because of lack of irreparable harm.  Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Smith, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2539 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

ATTORNEYS AND ATTORNEYS’ FEES

 

In a fifth appeal from an order awarding attorney’s fees as a sanction in civil litigation, the appellate affirmed, finding that the successor judge had authority to take additional testimony as there were no instructions in the previous opinion as to the remand, but remanded with instructions to include interest.  Cox v. Great American Ins. Co., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2525 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

 

BUSINESS AND EMPLOYMENT

 

Trial court erred by entering a final order dismissing an amended complaint for breach of contract against successor entities by concluding “successor liability and continuation of business are post judgment theories appropriate only if the Plaintiff is first able to obtain a judgment” because of “longstanding case law permitting claims to be made against successor corporations and alter egos.”  Oceanside Plaza Condominium Association, Inc. v. Foam King Industries, Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2505 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

Judge of Compensation Claims correctly denied claim for permanent total disability benefits was premature, not because claimant remained totally disabled at the end of the 104-week eligibility for temporary total benefits per section 440.15(2) (a), Florida Statutes, but because that section had been declared unconstitutional, thereby reviving “the pre-1994 statute that provided for a limitation of 260 weeks of temporary total disability benefits.”  Jones v. Food Lion, Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2490 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

 

CIVIL PROCEDURE

 

Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion to transfer venue for convenience because, although several witnesses were not located in Palm Beach County, defendant failed to demonstrate he actually intended to call them or indicate the significance of their testimony.  Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Smith, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2539 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

Trial court erred in dismissing a bank’s declaratory action against a condominium association seeking entitlement to the safe harbor protection for unpaid assessment contained in section 718.116, Florida Statutes because the dismissal of the association in a previous mortgage foreclosure action by the bank’s predecessor precluded the imposition of the doctrine of collateral estoppels and because the issue of lien priority was never actually litigated.  PNC Bank, National Association v. Inlet Village Condominium Association, Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2523 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

Trial court erred by entering an amended final judgment because plaintiff had filed a notice of voluntary dismissal, thereby divesting the trial court of jurisdiction.  Bank of New York Mellon v. Poker Run Acquisitions, Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2518 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

Trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion for new trial and imposing sanctions on a partner primarily responsible for the trial because he “repeatedly violated the court’s directions, and exposed the jury to inadmissible evidence,” but did abuse its discretion by imposing sanctions on the associate attorney who assisted her partner who had on one occasion mistakenly stated she had spoken with a witness when in fact it was a summer intern who had done so.  Robinson v. Ward, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2497 (Fla. 2d DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

Trial court properly dismissed a declaratory action seeking a tax refund on basis of res judicata because the complaint referenced a case decided in a different circuit which addressed the same issue and involved the same parties.  Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Dept. of Revenue, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2477 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

 

COLLECTIONS

 

Trial court erred by entering a final judgment of garnishment because the court failed to consider the merits of the city’s motion to dissolve and erred in holding that the second motion to dissolve was untimely as it was filed within 20 days of receipt of the bank’s amended answer.  City of Delray Beach v. Desisto, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2529 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

CONSUMER PROTECTION

 

DISCOVERY AND EVIDENCE

 

The United States Supreme Court’s decision in Crawford v, Washington, 541 U,S. 36 (2004)and the Sixth Amendment confrontation clause of the United State Constitution do not abrogate Florida’s dying declaration exception to the hearsay rule, section 90.804(2)(b), Florida Statutes. Davis v. State of Florida, 41 Fla. L. Weekly S528 (Fla. Nov. 10, 2016).

 

ESTATE PLANNING, GUARDIANSHIP AND PROBATE

 

GIVERNMENT

 

Trial court erred by entering a final summary judgment dismissing a claim of individual negligence against a school bus driver because an earlier appeal holding the school board had not duty was not the law of the case and because there were disputed issues of fact as to whether the school bus driver required the students to cross the street in violation of school board policy and whether such actions placed him beyond the protection of sovereign immunity per section 768,28(9)(a), Florida Statues.  Davis v. Baez, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2510 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

INSURANCE

 

Trial court erred by entering a summary judgment holding a UM carrier liable because the plaintiff had exited the insured vehicle thirty minutes previous to being struck by an underinsured motorist while standing ten feet away and the policy unambiguously provided coverage to non-owners who were occupying the insured vehicle.  State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins. Co. v. Bailey, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2493 (Fla. 2d DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

 

REAL PROPERTY

 

In mortgage foreclosure action, trial court erred by dismissing action on basis of improper verification because “certification executed by appellant’s counsel complied with” section 702.015(4), Florida Statutes.  Bank of America, N.A. v. Leonard, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2549 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 14, 2016).

 

In mortgage foreclosure action, trial court properly denied mortgagor’s Rule 1.540(b) (4) motion alleging judgment was void for lack of standing because the entity that brought the action and obtained a final judgment was U.S. Bank the “fact that the caption of the final judgment identified Bank of America, N.A. was no more than a scrivener’s error.”  Rincon v. Bank of America, N.A., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2509 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 9 2016).

 

Trial court erred by entering a final order dismissing on basis of statute of limitations an amended complaint for breach of contract and damages allegedly resulting from faulty roofing materials because it relied upon allegations made in the original complaint which was abandoned and no longer a pleading when the amended complaint was filed.  Oceanside Plaza Condominium Association, Inc. v. Foam King Industries, Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2505 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

Trial court properly denied motion to vacate foreclosure sale claiming section 702.035, Florida Statutes was an unconstitutional special law because the property owner failed to comply with the requirements of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.071, which requires service of any motion raising a constitutional issue to be served on the Attorney General or the state attorney.  Shelton v. Bank of New York Mellon, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2495 (Fla. 2d DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

TORT

 

Trial court properly granted summary judgment dismissing wrongful death action for negligent supervision brought by parents of a sixteen year old son who died from falling off an all-terrain vehicle driven by defendants’ minor son because the uncontroverted evidence was defendants’ son drove the vehicle for the first time without his parents’ permission or knowledge.  Perez v. Rodriguez, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2540 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

In a tobacco litigation case, the appellate court held the court abused its discretion in admitting expert testimony because the expert did not explain the Bradford Hill criteria nor provide any data or studies of the association between mesothelioma and chrysotile asbestos as required by the Daubert standard.  Crane Co. v. Delisle, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2532 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 9, 2016) (denying motion for rehearing but substituting opinion reported at 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2133).

 

In defamation action, trial court properly entered final summary judgment of dismissal because appellant failed to present any evidence to refute affidavits and deposition testimony from defendant that he did not write the alleged defamatory statement on a postcard sent through the mail and had no knowledge that it was done by his son.  Navellier v. Shortz, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2530 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

In a suit brought by a senior in high school against a security guard company for negligent hiring, retaining, and supervising a guard who videotaped her undressed, trial court erred by entering a final judgment after jury verdict, because “Florida’s impact rule precludes recovery of damages in tort cases for emotional distress absent any physical injury.”  G4S Secure Solutions, USA, Inc. v. Golzar, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2514 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

In defamation case, trial court erred by instructing jury that malice could be inferred “where the false publication was made with such gross and reckless negligence as to amount to actual malice” and the error was not harmless because “the jury’s verdict found that the wrongful conduct arose ‘solely’ from an economic motivation, not malevolence.”  Crestview Hospital Corp. v. Coastal Anesthesia, P.A., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2479 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 9, 2016).

 

 

 

COPYRIGHT 2017 RANDALL O. REDER.  If you have any comments or suggestions, please contact Randall Reder at (813) 960-1952 or at reder@redersdigest.com.

 

 

Weekly Reder for November 11, 2016

These are summaries of cases reported in the November 11, 2016, edition of the Florida Law Weekly.  The links take you directly to the appellate courts’ websites for the original, unpublished opinions.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE

 

 

APPELLATE

 

Appellant’s challenge of a non-final order granting temporary injunctive relief was rendered “moot due to Appellant’s decision to move to dissolve the injunction before the trial court.”  Saidin v Korecki, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2473 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 4, 2016) and AAOEP USA, Inc. v. Pex German OE Parts, LLC, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2473 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 4, 2016).

 

Appellate court issued a writ of mandamus ordering Department of Education to conduct a hearing on a parent’s petition seeking “a permanent exemption from statewide standardized testing for her daughter who has a number of serious medical conditions.”  Drew v. Florida Dept. of Education, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2459 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 2, 2016).

 

On appellant mortgagor’s motion for rehearing, appellate court explained that the order denying appellant’s motion to quash was a nonfinal, nonappeable order, but explained in a footnote the appellant could challenge the order at the conclusion of the case.  Vujin v. U.S. Bank National Association, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2456 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 2, 2016).

 

 

ATTORNEYS AND ATTORNEYS’ FEES

 

Trial court abused its discretion in denying a 57.105, Florida Statute motion for attorney’s fees on basis that defendant had raised an affirmative defense that was not “entirely basis” because the trial court’s analysis was based on the pre 1999 version of section 57.105, because in this case the plaintiff was able to get the defendant to admit in deposition it had no evidence to support its affirmative defense of setoff.  Infiniti Employment Solutions, Inc. v. MS Liquidators of Arizona, LLC, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2469 (Fla. 5th DCA Nov. 4, 2016).

 

Trial court erred in denying motion for attorney’s fees on the basis no claim was made in the wherefore clause of the complaint because plaintiff was aware of plaintiff’s claim. Zurro v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2454 (Fla. 2d DCA Nov. 2, 2016).

 

 

BUSINESS AND EMPLOYMENT

 

Judge of Compensation Claims properly denied claimant’s attorney’s request for attorney’s fees because the employer/carrier accepted responsibility for medical expenses within the thirty-day grace period even though it did not pay the medical bills until after the thirty days.  Sansone v. Frank Crum/Frank Winston Crum Ins., Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2463 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 2, 2016).

 

 

 

CIVIL PROCEDURE

 

Trial court erred by entering a final summary judgment in a replevin action because there were “diametrically opposed versions of the facts in their respective sworn affidavits” . . . “regarding removal of Appellant’s property from the house.”  Skelton v. Real Estate Solutions Home Sellers, LLC, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2466 (Fla. 5th DCA Nov. 4, 2016).

 

 

 

COLLECTIONS

 

 

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

 

 

CONSUMER PROTECTION

 

DISCOVERY AND EVIDENCE

 

Trial court did not depart from essential requirements of law in denying motion for protective order claiming that the notice of depositions of the president and chief executive officer was for purposes of harassment and neither had anything to do with the day-to-day operations of the corporation because the affidavits also admitted to meeting with plaintiff’s president and discussing the management of the hotel with lower-level employees.  Remington Lodging & Hospitality, LLC v. Southernmost House, Ltd., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2457 (Fla. 3d DCA Nov. 2, 2016).

 

ESTATE PLANNING, GUARDIANSHIP AND PROBATE

 

Trial court erred in denying an aide’s motion requesting court to enforce an “earlier order appointing the ward’s son to pay a $25,000 gift to the aide upon the ward’s death” because the motion required an evidentiary hearing to determine the timing of the ward’s gifts and the conditions by which the ward was to make the gifts.  Cajuste v. Herlitschek, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2445 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 2, 2016).

 

INSURANCE

 

 

 

 

REAL PROPERTY

 

Trial court did not error in temporarily enjoining a condominium association for collecting assessments for anticipated non-recurring legal and engineering fees because “the assessments were ‘special assessments’ that required a different approval process versus the amended budget process that the Association used.”  Shores of Panama Resort Community Association, Inc. v. Shores of Panama City, LLC, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2458 (Fla. 1st DCA Nov. 2, 2016).

 

Trial court abused its discretion in denying motion to vacate a final judgment of dismissal premised upon the entry of a clerk’s default because plaintiff “had actual knowledge both that [defendant] intended to defend the foreclosure lawsuit and that [defendant] was represented by counsel.”  Jacaranda, LLC v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2454 (Fla. 2d DCA Nov. 2, 2016).

 

Trial court properly entered a final judgment of mortgage foreclosure because “bank’s pre-complaint pooling and servicing agreement and corresponding mortgage loan schedule expressly indicated that the agreement included the borrower’s loan.”  Bolous v. U.S. Bank National Association, 41 Fla. L. weekly D2448 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 2, 2016).

 

 

 

TORT

 

Trial court did not error in dismissing with prejudice a third amended complaint that alleged negligence of a 911 operator in responding to a call for medical assistance because there were no allegations of a “special relationship and there was no increased risk of harm to make the undertaker’s doctrine applicable.  Jordan v. Nienhuis, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2464 (Fla. 5th DCA Nov. 4, 2016).

 

Appellate court affirmed trial court’s dismissal of complaint by former wife against her former husband’s employer for conspiring with her former husband to fraudulently conceal his true income because the complaint was seeking to establish a new cause of action, but certified the following as a question of great public importance:

“May a former spouse pursue an independent tort claim against the employer of the other former spouse for fraudulent conduct that (1) occurs after the final judgment and (2) falsely depresses that spouse’s income so as to limit the obligation for child support?”

Chanin v. Feigenheimer, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2446 (Fla. 4th DCA Nov. 2, 2016).

 

 

 

 

COPYRIGHT 2017 RANDALL O. REDER.  If you have any comments or suggestions, please contact Randall Reder at (813) 960-1952 or at reder@redersdigest.com.

 

Weekly Reder for November 04, 2016

These are summaries of cases reported in the November 4, 2016, edition of the Florida Law Weekly.  The links take you directly to the appellate courts’ websites for the original, unpublished opinions.

 

ADMINISTRATIVE

 

Trial court properly dismissed claims against sitting judgment alleging failure to comply with financial disclosure requirements because the judge substantially complied with section 105.031, Florida Statutes by filling out and filing Form 6 promulgated by the Florida Commission on Ethics.  Bloch v. Del Rey, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2415 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 26, 2016).

 

 

Appellate court dismissed portion of appeal challenging judgment on the pleadings denying declaratory action seeking injunctive relief concerning campaign activities because “the election has already been held, the grounds upon which injunctive relief was sought are now moot.”  Bloch v. Del Rey, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2415 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 26, 2016).

 

 

 

APPELLATE

 

Appellate court dismissed portion of appeal challenging judgment on the pleadings denying declaratory action seeking injunctive relief concerning campaign activities because “the election has already been held, the grounds upon which injunctive relief was sought are now moot.”  Bloch v. Del Rey, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2415 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 26, 2016).

 

In mortgage foreclosure action, appellate court dismissed appeal on basis GMAC had not provided a transcript of the proceedings, stating that “GMAC’s post-hearing efforts to create a record by affidavits of counsel and the GMAC witness who testified are too little too late.”  GMAC Mortgage, LLC v. Palenzuela, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2405 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 26, 2016).

 

 

 

ATTORNEYS AND ATTORNEYS’ FEES

 

In resolving a conflict among the district courts of appeals, the Florida Supreme Court held that separate offers by different plaintiffs to separate defendants were valid as they complied with the requirements of section 76879, Florida Statutes and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442, and proposals for settlement were not to be construed as ambiguous because of the plaintiffs not seeking separate verdict forms and the parties’ referring to the defendants collectively.  Anderson v. Hilton Hotels Corp., 41 Fla. L. Weekly S500 (Fla. Nov. 3, 2016).

 

BUSINESS AND EMPLOYMENT

 

 

CIVIL PROCEDURE

 

In a case on remand, trial court erred in denying a motion for protective order because the appellate court’s mandate remanded with instructions to hold an evidentiary hearing on the “threshold of whether the arbitration clause was contained in a binding agreement between the parties” and the trial court was “without authority to modify or evade that mandate.”  MetroPCS Communications, Inc. v. Porter, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2442 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 31, 2016).

 

Trial court erred by denying motion to dismiss for improper venue because an endorsement to a UM insurance policy specifically and unambiguously provided venue in at the place of the insured’s residence and because plaintiff’s argument that it would be “judicially uneconomical” to litigate the case in Pennsylvania was not sufficient to show the “mandatory forum selection clause was unreasonable or unjust.”  Allstate Fire and Casualty Ins. Co. v. Hradecky, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2413 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 26, 2016).

 

Trial court erred in striking the plaintiff’s pleadings and dismissing the case as a sanction for failing to timely abide by a court order compelling production of documents and failing to appear at a hearing because the trial court considered only the first of the six Kozel factors and failed to make any determination regarding the credibility of the affidavits claiming the failure to appear was due to a secretarial mistake.  EMM Enterprises Two, LLC v. Fromberg, Perlow & Kornik, P.A., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2404 (Fla. 4th DCA Oct. 26, 2016).

 

In a case certified by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit involving taxpayers’ suit against their financial advisors “alleging a host of state law claims”, the Florida Supreme Court held that the “claims accrued at the time their action in the tax court becoming final, following expiration of the ninety-day time period for appealing the tax court’s judgment.”  Kipnis v. Bayerische Hypo-Und Vereinsbank, AG, 41 Fla. L. Weekly S490 (Fla. Nov. 3, 2016).

 

 

 

 

COLLECTIONS

 

 

 

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW

 

 

CONSUMER PROTECTION

 

DISCOVERY AND EVIDENCE

 

In mortgage foreclosure action, trial court erred by admitting into evidence over a hearsay objection a “screenshot” showing sale of loan to plaintiff because plaintiff’s witness “testified that she did not know who entered that information or whether it was entirely computer generated.”  Miller v. Bank of America, N.A., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2421 (Fla. 5th DCA Oct. 28, 2016).

 

In a will-contest action, trial court did not depart from the essential requirements of law by requiring decedent’s attorney to answer questions at deposition relating to the testator’s “reasons for disinheriting” the other children.  Vasallo v. Bean, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2407 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 26, 2016).

 

ESTATE PLANNING, GUARDIANSHIP AND PROBATE

 

“[A]n estate or a beneficiary of a revocable trust created by the decedent may [not] compel the trustee to render an accounting or receipts and disbursements made during the life of the decedent, where the trust did not require an accounting, the seller never requested accountings during her lifetime, and there is no showing of any breach of fiduciary duty on the part of the trustee.’  Hilgendorf v. Estate of Thelma Coleman, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2402 (Fla. 4th DCA Oct. 26, 2016).

 

GOVERNMENT

 

“Section 316.0083(1)(a) authorize[s] a municipality to contract with a third party vendor to sort images from a traffic infraction detector system into queues based on written directives from the municipality.”  City of Oldsmar v. Trinh, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2435 (Fla. 2d DCA Oct. 28, 2016).

 

“Sections 316.640(5) (a) and 316.0083, Florida Statutes [do not] prohibit a municipality from contracting with a third party vendor to electronically generate and mail a notice of violation and uniform traffic citation after the city’s traffic infraction hearing officer finds probable cause to issue a notice of violation and authorizes the vendor to electronically generate and mail the notice by clicking ‘accept’ in the software program used by the city and vendor.”  City of Oldsmar v. Trinh, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2435 (Fla. 2d DCA Oct. 28, 2016).

 

 

INSURANCE

 

 

 

 

REAL PROPERTY

 

Trial court erred by entering a final summary judgment dismissing a mortgage foreclosure action because affidavits by mortgagors they never received mandatory pre-suit notice were insufficient to prove notice was not delivered.  JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v. Ostrander, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2434 (Fla. 2d DCA Oct. 28, 2016).

 

In a mortgage foreclosure action, trial court by entering an involuntary dismissal at the conclusion of a non-jury trial because the “order was premised upon an intervening party’s impermissible assertion of a defense that had never been raised by any of the defendants.”  Ventures Trust 2013-I-H-R v. Asset Acquisitions and Holding Trust, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2432 (Fla. 2d DCA Oct. 28, 2016).

 

In a dispute between two condominium associations where each claim ownership of the front desk, the trial court erred in reasoning that a “courses and distances” measurement necessarily superseded square footage allocation with the Declaration because the measurements contained in the graphic description attached as an exhibit to the Declaration were not a “courses and distances “ measurement, and units were specifically identified as the 395 square foot area of the interior walls.  Shores of Panama Club, LLC v. Shores of Panama Resort Community Association, Inc., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2425 (Fla. 1st DCA Oct. 28, 2016).

 

Trial court properly dismissed with prejudice a complaint brought by near-by homeowners seeking declaratory relief and injunctive relief regarding a private developers’ to lease and develop on public lands because plaintiffs were neither parties nor third party beneficiaries of the proposed agreements between the developer and the city and because the plaintiffs’ proximity to the project was not sufficient to show a “special injury” different in kind from the rest of the public.  Herbits v. City of Miami, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2408 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 26, 2016).

 

In a construction lien law case, the trial court erred by granting a motion for directed verdict on the basis of plaintiff’s witness admitting work was completed on a date outside the ninety day time limit for filing a claim of lien because the witness had also testified there were other dates within the ninety day period in which work was done.  Best Drywall Services, Inc. v. Blaszczyk, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2392 (Fla. 2d DCA Oct. 26, 2016).

 

In a case certified to be of great public importance, the Florida Supreme Court held that a “Bank’s attempted prior acceleration in a foreclosure action that was involuntarily dismissed did not trigger the statute of limitations to bar future foreclosure actions based on separate defaults.”  Bartram v. U.S. Bank National Association, 41 Fla. L. Weekly S493 (Fla. Nov. 3, 2016).

 

 

 

TORT

 

Section 766.118, Florida Statutes, which places a cap on non-economic damages is unconstitutional because there is no distinction between cases with multiple claimants in a wrongful death case in which the Florida Supreme Court held section 766.188 unconstitutional (Estate of McCall v. United States, 124 So. 3d 894 (Fla. 2014)) and cases with a single plaintiff in a personal injury case.  Port Charlotte HMA, LLC v. Suarez, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2393 (Fla. 2d DCA Oct. 26, 2016).

 

 

COPYRIGHT 2017 RANDALL O. REDER.  If you have any comments or suggestions, please contact Randall Reder at (813) 960-1952 or at reder@redersdigest.com.

 

Gator Boring & Trenching, Inc. v. Westra Construction Corp.

Trial court erred by entering a partial summary judgment dismissing a subcontractor’s lien on basis the lien was fraudulent due to it including amounts for additional work caused by changed conditions not recoverable under contract because defendants failed to prove willful exaggeration of the claim, the amount of which was hotly contested.  Gator Boring & Trenching, Inc. v. Westra Construction Corp., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2269 (Fla. 2d DCA Oct. 5, 2016).

Brittany’s Place Condominium Association, Inc. v. U.S Bank, N.A

In dispute between bank and condominium association over the safe harbor provision limiting liability for unpaid condominium assessments afforded by section 718.116(1) (b), Florida Statutes, the trial court properly granted summary judgment in favor of the bank even though the owner of the note was Fannie Mae because “ownership of the note and mortgage is not determinative of entitlement to the limited liability of the safe harbor provision in all instances.”  Brittany’s Place Condominium Association, Inc. v. U.S. Bank, N.A., 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2267 (Fla. 2d DCA Oct. 5, 2016).

Charbonier Food Service, LLC v. 121 Alhambra Tower, LLC

In commercial lease dispute, trial court erred in requiring tenant to deposit one half of the disputed amount of additional rents into the court registry because the contract was ambiguous and therefore the judge was required to hold an evidentiary hearing to determine the intent of the parties.  Charbonier Food Services, LLC v. 121 Alhambra Tower, LLC, 41 Fla. L. Weekly D2282 (Fla. 3d DCA Oct. 5, 2016).