terry's takes
Filtered by category: punitive damagesNovember 13, 2024
3rd dca, punitive damagesSommers v. Philip Morris USA, Inc.
The estate of a deceased smoker suing for wrongful death could not seek punitive damages from a tobacco company. Defendants are entitled to setoff for prior amounts for punitive damages that punish the same conduct in a subsequent case. Though punitive damages were theoretically available for the non-intentional and intentional torts, because the jury only awarded $1 million in compensatory damages and because Philip Morris USA has already paid $198 million in punitive damages for the conduct in Engle cases (deluding non-smokers into thinking smoking was safe), Plaintiff would have to win more than $198 million. And even if a jury awarded that, the ratio of such punitive damages to only $1 million in compensatory damages would make the award unconstitutional.
read moreApril 1, 2024
3rd dca, punitive damagesGattorno v. Souto
In Florida, juries may award punitive damages for negligence involving intoxication. A recent case allowed a plaintiff to pursue punitive damages after alleging that a defendant, while allegedly intoxicated, backed her car into the plaintiff in a parking lot, causing severe injuries. Despite disputes over the defendant’s level of intoxication, the court found a reasonable basis to proceed with punitive damages. Citing a 1976 Florida Supreme Court ruling, the court emphasized that both state law and courts support punitive measures to deter drunk driving, highlighting the public safety risks posed by intoxicated drivers.
read moreApril 1, 2024
5th dca, punitive damagesCrump v. Am. Multi-Cinema, Inc.
The 5th DCA affirmed a trial court’s order forbidding Plaintiff from presenting a claim for punitive damages. People in the parking lot of an AMC movie theatre fled inside when someone in the parking lot fired a gun. Plaintiff Crump was inside the theatre to see a film. An AMC theater employee ordered everyone to leave the theater, another theatre-goer shouted that there was an active shooter, and Plaintiff Crump was trampled by the panicked crowd on their way out.
read moreMarch 14, 2024
4th dca, punitive damagesSelz v. McKagen
The Fourth DCA recently reversed a trial court's decision allowing a plaintiff to pursue punitive damages against a tenant accused of filing fraudulent liens to hinder a property sale. While the tenant’s actions suggested fraudulent intent, the court found that a mere 'should have known' standard was insufficient to warrant punitive damages, as it requires actual knowledge of wrongdoing. Judge Warner concurred, though he noted his disagreement with prior Fourth DCA rulings on the punitive damages statute. The Fourth DCA has now certified an express conflict with decisions from the Second and Fifth DCAs, signaling a potential issue for the Florida Supreme Court to resolve.
read moreJune 21, 2023
4th dca, punitive damagesNapleton’s North Palm Auto Park, Inc. v. Agosto
agosto and an unnamed fellow employee both worked at napleton’s north palm auto park, a car dealership. the unnamed employee (“employee”) had a few alcoholic drinks at lunch. later that evening, he drove his car into agosto’s parked car. the employee wa...
read moreMay 17, 2023
4th dca, amendment of pleadings, punitive damagesHRB Tax Group, Inc. v. Florida Investigation Bureau, Inc.
the fourth dca shot down a claim for punitive damages. the florida investigation bureau, inc. sued hrb tax group, inc., alleging fraud from one of the defendant’s employees telling the plaintiff that their tax liability could be reduced by investing $25...
read moreApril 5, 2023
4th dca, amendment of pleadings, medical malpractice, punitive damagesMarder v. Mueller
Roberta Mueller sued Dr. Marder for medical malpractice, claiming he gave her aggressive radiation treatments for a skin lesion, allegedly for financial gain. She sought punitive damages, arguing the treatments were unnecessary and dangerous, and cited Dr. Marder’s past Medicare fraud charges. Although the trial court allowed the punitive damages claim, the DCA overturned it, finding insufficient evidence that Dr. Marder knowingly acted with disregard for her safety or was motivated by profit in her specific case.
read moreMarch 25, 2023
3rd dca, petition for certiorari, punitive damagesFederal Express Corp. v. Gadith Sabbah
In Federal Express Corp. v. Gadith Sabbah, the Third DCA addressed whether FedEx could challenge the trial court's order allowing a punitive damages claim through appeal or certiorari. Due to procedural timing, the DCA ruled that FedEx's challenge fell under certiorari rather than appeal, applying a more restrictive standard. With no departure from procedural requirements found, the court denied FedEx’s cert petition but left the door open for appeal after a final judgment. Full opinion available.
read moreContact Us
Our Promise
Aggressive Litigation. Honest Representation. Dedicated Communication. Respect and Compassion.
