The Fifth District Court of Appeal recently reviewed a dismissal with prejudice as a sanction for failure to comply with a trial order in Faris v. Southern-Owners Ins. Co., 5D16-4037 (Fla. 5th DCA Mar. 9, 2018). Plaintiff, the injured motorist, notified the defendant, his UM carrier, that he would be undergoing spinal surgery. The carrier requested a pre-surgery CME, but scheduling proved difficult.  The carrier’s motion to compel CME resulted in an order that plaintiff undergo a preoperative CME or postpone the surgery.  It also compelled the carrier to provide […]

Tovar v. Russell, 2018 Fla. App. LEXIS 2940 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) concerned a pre-suit settlement offer and acceptance in an auto accident case.  Plaintiff’s counsel offered to settle the matter if State Farm (1) tendered its policy limits of $50,000; (2) reimbursed the plaintiff an additional $10,044 for his property loss; (3) provided an affidavit from the tortfeasor stating she had no other insurance coverage; and (4) provided a certified copy of the tortfeasor’s policy.  State Farm accepted by complying with the entirety of the offer.  But, in addition, […]

As attorneys and claims representatives, we are always mindful of Proposals for Settlement.  We often get questions concerning what is the last day the client can safely serve the Proposal.  In Meyrowitz v. Schwartz, 2018 Fla. App. LEXIS 2943 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018), the Fourth District Court of Appeal recently considered this question.  On December 1, 2016, a judge entered an order setting a case for trial on the eight-week calendar beginning March 20, 2017 and ending May 12, 2017.  On March 1, 2017, a different judge set the case […]

The Honorable Ralph Humphries entered a Final Compensation Order on February 23, 2018 denying temporary partial disability benefits.  Following the claimant’s compensable accident, the employer repeatedly offered the claimant work by way of certified letters and verbal conversations.  The claimant contended that the specific jobs offered were outside of the work restrictions assigned by his authorized treating physicians and filed a petition for benefits requesting temporary disability benefits.  Our client denied the benefits by asserting an affirmative defense based on voluntary limitation of income.  Partner Blake Hood, Esquire, defended the […]

Boyd & Jenerette is pleased to welcome Attorney, Kailey M. Evans. She joins the firm as an Associate in our Orlando office. Kailey has always been dedicated to helping others and she carries that dedication into the cases she works on. Following law school, Kailey joined Boyd & Jenerette in 2009, working in the Jacksonville office. In 2014, Kailey decided that she wanted to move back to her hometown of Orlando and started working at the State Attorney’s Office. During her three years as a prosecutor, Kailey was able to enhance […]

A Florida circuit court jury returned a defense verdict for our client, a car seat manufacturer, after almost three years of litigation and a three-week trial. Plaintiff’s counsel had initially asked the jury to award between $10.5 and $15.5 million in this complex litigation involving a serious spinal injury.The products liability case was initially filed under four claims: strict liability and negligent design defect, and negligent and strict liability warnings claims. Three claims were dropped before trial, which proceeded only under the negligent design defect claim. Boyd & Jenerette prepared the case […]

In Marin v. Infinity Auto Insurance Company, the Third District Court of Appeal considered whether the trial court’s order enforcing a settlement was in error. The Court held that the trial court was correct in enforcing a settlement because the insurer’s act of placing a lienholder on the settlement check as a payee was not a counteroffer. The Plaintiff’s attorney made a demand for the $10,000 bodily injury liability limit to settle Marin’s claim against infinity’s policyholder. Because Jackson Memorial Hospital had a lien for medical expenses it provided to […]

The Fourth DCA issued an opinion dealing with (1) the reliability prong of the Daubert analysis and (2) the enforceability of a proposal for settlement containing typographical errors.In Sanchez v. Cinque, Case No. 4D16-2530, a customer of a day spa sustained injuries as a result of a chemical peel. The defense appealed a jury’s award to the Plaintiff arguing, in part, that it was error to strike the testimony of the defendant’s dermatologist concerning the impact of the chemical peel on Plaintiff’s pre-existing rosacea condition. The dermatologist examined the plaintiff, […]

The Second DCA recently issued an opinion concerning contingent fee multipliers. “In setting reasonable attorneys’ fees, Florida courts use the federal lodestar approach which requires a determination of the number of hours reasonably expended multiplied by the reasonable hourly rate. Once the lodestar amount is determined, the trial court may add or subtract from that amount based upon a ‘contingency risk’ factor and the ‘results obtained.’” Citizens Property Ins. Corp. v. Anderson, Case No. 2D16-616.  One factor the court must consider is “whether the relevant market requires a contingency fee […]

In Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Gore, Case No. 4D15-3892, the Fourth DCA recently issued an opinion on the preservation of error of Daubert challenges. In this wrongful death case, Plaintiff called an expert historian to testify concerning Defendant’s use of ammonia to increase the addictiveness of cigarettes. The trial court allowed the expert to testify on that issue but not on the chemistry of tobacco. On appeal, the defense argued that the expert went beyond a historical opinion into the realm of a scientific opinion by testifying that adding […]