News & Events

Rod Lundy, a partner, and Tylar Heintz, an associate, both of our Orlando office, secured a favorable verdict in an admitted liability auto jury trial where defense experts testified to existence of an non-permanent injury, and defendants conceded $30,000 of the $179,000 in past medicals. As such, the judge granted Plaintiff a directed verdict  on the issue of causation for the soft tissue injuries but allowed the defense to dispute causation and permanency.   

Orlando associate attorney, Tiffany Miles, recently won a “Daubert” Motion, striking a plaintiff’s tire manufacturing and design engineer expert with over thirty years of experience in an auto negligence case pending in Volusia County, Florida. Ms. Miles deposed the expert engineer and composed the motion, arguing that per Fla. Stat. 90.702(1), the expert had come to conclusions that were speculative, bore no relation to the facts of the case, were not based upon “sufficient facts or data” to stand alone, and were rife with inadmissible “inference stacking.” After an evidentiary hearing with a proffer by the Plaintiff and cross-examination of the tire expert, the Court granted defendant’s motion in full; finding the expert had not relied upon the facts of the sufficient to meet the standard of admissibility of expert testimony. The Court refused to admit any testimony by the expert at trial.

Orlando attorneys, partner Rod Lundy and associate Tiffany Miles, recently won a motion for summary judgment in Hillsborough County for an automobile insurer in a declaration action, where the court found no duty to defend or indemnify an insured for a motor vehicle accident.  The insured operated a rented U-Haul when hitting a vehicle with 6 individuals, all claiming injury.  The carrier denied coverage, alleging the rented U-Haul was not covered under the insured’s policy.  The insured retained counsel after the six individuals in the opposing vehicle made injury claims.  Attorneys Lundy and Miles filed a declaratory judgment action, contending the rented U-Haul as a commercial vehicle was not a “covered” “insured” or “listed” auto under the policy, as it was a private passenger vehicle with “a cab separate from the cargo area;” they further contended the insured’s business use of the U-Haul fell within the policy’s “commercial enterprise” exclusion.  Several corporate and individual depositions preceded the carrier’s motion, which was opposed by the insured.  The motion for summary judgment was granted in full, and a final judgment was entered on behalf of the insurance company.

Robert Horwitz, a partner in the West Palm Beach/Hollywood office, Paula Romero, an associate of our West Palm Beach office and Jesse Dyer, an associate with our appellate department obtained a defense verdict with a finding of no coverage. The Carrier had first found coverage during its claim investigation and paid the insured for repairs to his kitchen with the insured filing a supplemental claim for payment of tear out of his entire case iron; plumbing system and repairs to his entire home.

Ryan W. Royce, an associate in the firm’s Tampa office, prevailed on a motion for summary judgment in a declaratory judgment action brought by Plaintiff against a condominium association (“Association”) after its board had voted for the removal of the onsite sewer system and construction of a new sewer lift station to be able to connect to county sewer lines.  The Plaintiff objected to construction of the new sewer lift station and filed a declaratory judgment action seeking a determination that a majority unit owner vote was required and that the granting of an easement in favor of the county should be deemed void as a matter of law.  In our motion for summary judgment, we successfully argued that although an easement is a real property interest in land, it is a right distinct from ownership of the land itself and does not confer title to the land on which the easement is imposed. Further, because an easement is a right of use and does not transfer title, the Association had the power to grant sewer related easements to the County without a unit owner vote. The trial court agreed with the defense and granted final summary judgment for the defendant. The defendant is now pursuing recovery of its attorney’s fees and costs.