United Engineering Corp. v. Hill/MK JV, 916 So. 2d 803 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
N/A
OUTCOME: Summary judgment upheld on appeal.
HELD: Construction manager entitled to judgment as a matter of law: the contract provision established that inspections and tests conducted by the contractor were for the benefit of the owner, and not ...the Plaintiff. Plaintiff could not justifiably rely on such information in carrying out its obligations under the contract. So no cause of action under Section 552 of the Florida Statutes and Second of Torts which recognized a cause of action in certain limited circumstances where information is negligently supplied for the guidance of others.
Business
Rio Mar Assocs., LP v. UHS of Puerto Rico, Inc., 522 F.3d 159 (U.S. 1st Cir. 2008)
N/A
OUTCOME: Court erred in excluding hotel from exercising rights under the law
Hotel guest, who suffered injuries after being struck by a wave while swimming in the ocean, brought personal injury action against hotel alleging negligent failure to warn of hazardous beach condition...s and negligent entrustment of beach safety to untrained and ill-equipped lifeguards and against treating hospital alleging, among other things, medical malpractice. After the hospital settled and jury returned a verdict in favor of guest, the United States District Court for the District of Puerto Rico denied hotel’s motions for a new trial and to alter or amend the verdict. Hotel appealed.
The First Circuit concluded that the district court erred as a matter of law in its assessment of the effect of its own instruction and, thus, erred in its interpretation of what the first-phase verdict signified. The jury award encompassed both the damages attributable to the Hotel’s beachfront negligence and the aggravating damages attributable to the Hospital’s alleged malpractice. Consequently, the district court erred in foreclosing further litigation; the Hotel was entitled to some process by which it could test how the plaintiff’s total damages – $1,844,000 – should be allocated as between it and the Hospital. The district court should not have denied the Rule 59(e) motion or dismissed the cross-claim without pursuing that inquiry.
The plaintiff and the Hospital cannot by contracting between themselves deny a third party rights that the third party (here, the Hotel) enjoys under the law.
The pivotal question concerns the allocation of damages as between settling and non-settling tortfeasors in a successive tortfeasor case.
Elder law
Martinez v. Smith, 159 So. 3d 394 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)
N/A
OUTCOME: Trial court’s appointment of professional guardian reversed.
HELD: The trial court erred in failing to honor a ward’s choice of guardian without finding that the appointment of his designated preneed guardian was contrary to the ward’s best interests as required... by § 744.312(4), Fla. Stat. (2012).
The trial court’s finding that appellant had moved the ward several times and did not communicate well with a care facility’s staff did not show that appellant “abused powers” granted to her by her designation as the ward’s health care surrogate such that those powers could be modified or revoked in accord with § 744.3115, Fla. Stat. (2012).
Family
Smith v. Smith, 224 So. 3d 740 (Fla. 2017)
N/A
OUTCOME: Trial court’s annulment of marriage reversed.
HELD: The appellate court erred by finding that the marriage was void because the Legislature did not intend for the concept of a “void” or “voidable” marriage to apply to the disputed provision in § 7...44.3215(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2016). The statute did not preclude the possibility of ratification of a marriage if the court subsequently gave its approval.
OUTCOME: Final monetary judgment against Estate reversed.
Final monetary judgment against Estate reversed. Appellate court agreed that law will not find unjust enrichment to create a contract implied- in -law. Case remanded for entry of judgment in favor of E...state.
HELD: There was no cause of action for a quasi contract as it was inequitable to force the child, whose estate won a large wrongful death award, to reimburse the mistaken father. The father discharged the duty of the biological father, not the child.
HELD: The lower court erroneously struck dentists’ answer to plaintiff’s complaint in a dental malpractice action and sanctions were only permissible if defendants were not in compliance with the reaso...nable investigation requirements.
Construction and development
United Engineering Corp. v. Hill/MK JV, 916 So. 2d 803 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
N/A
OUTCOME: Summary judgment upheld on appeal
HELD: Construction manager entitled to judgment as a matter of law: the contract provision established that inspections and tests conducted by the contractor were for the benefit of the owner, and not ...the Plaintiff. Plaintiff could not justifiably rely on such information in carrying out its obligations under the contract. So no cause of action under Section 552 of the Florida Statutes and Second of Torts which recognized a cause of action in certain limited circumstances where information is negligently supplied for the guidance of others.
$4.44 million dollar judgment against Morrison Knudsen Corp. in a construction dispute reversed.
Business
Leisure Time Coins, Inc. v. Republic Metals Corp. and RMC2, LLC,
N/A
OUTCOME: Prevailed on all issues
Case No. 01-14-0001-8760 (American Arbitration Association) (2016)
Prevailed on all issues before commercial arbitration tribunal involving dispute between precious metals and bullion dealer and pre...cious metals purchaser. [Claims made under breach of contract; Florida Deception and Unfair Trade Practices Act; civil RICO; conversion; unjust enrichment]
