I reside in a Florida city that is considered historical and I am being sued by a property developer for notifying city officials about a neighboring historic structure that was wrongly razed. The City followed up on my written complaint and found it to be true. They stopped the work and asked the Developer to present himself in front of the Historic Board. The Board told the Developer that he had greatly exceeded his original permits and asked him to reconstruct the structure. In turn, the Developer is suing me for bringing this issue to the attention of the City. My attorney did not have the case dismissed as the plaintiff is playing the Malicious Intent card, but without any proof. Unfortunately, Florida has narrow anti - SLAPP suit statutes, so my attorney is recommending trial.
You need to openly discuss all of your options with your attorney. If you are still confused as to which path to take, you should obtain a second opinion from another attorney. Asking attorneys to second guess your counsel here on limited facts is not likely to be very helpful to you.
However, your attorney will explain that sometimes your options are very limited when you are the Defendant.
1 lawyer agrees
Construction / Development Lawyer
I have more of a comment than an answer: If the facts are as you state, this developer must have more money than sense. I'm not a Florida attorney, but it is hard to imagine that the developer has a legal claim against you if all that you did was report a violation of a historic ordinance.
Having said that, I fully agree the other answer that going to court as a defendant carries a fair amount of risk with it. An attorney here on Avvo really can't comment on your attorney' s recommendation without knowing how that attorney has assessed the option, but you certainly need to make sure that all alternatives to trial are considered and that you make an informed decision. Good luck.