
Trial Verdicts and Results
Junior Partners Katherine E. McKinley and Zachary J. Brewer obtained a full defense verdict on April 24, 2024 in a defamation case styled Plaintiff v. YMCA, et al. Plaintiff was the 62 year old male chair of the board of advisors for a camp and one of the Defendants was a 20 year old female waterfront director of the camp. Defendant reported Plaintiff for kissing her on the face, making inappropriate jokes, and holding her inappropriately on a jet ski ride. The camp terminated Plaintiff’s volunteer status. Plaintiff sued the Defendants alleging his father’s death was the result of alleged defamation and sought damages for the loss of his father.
Plaintiff asserted that Defendant completely fabricated her complaints out of a political disagreement and/or to seek leverage in her employment. In arguments, Plaintiff blamed Defendant for the death of his father by suicide two months later and ultimately asked the jury to hold Defendants responsible for his father’s death, as well as alleged severe and permanent mental anguish, with physical manifestations.
The Court granted directed verdict to two Defendants. Plaintiff proceeded solely against two others. Following closing arguments, the jury deliberated for less than two hours and returned a complete Defense verdict establishing that Defendant had not defamed Plaintiff with her reports of sexual harassment. Read More
Senior Partner Derrick M Kelly, Esq., and Associate Madeline Dixon, Esq., obtained a favorable result in a general liability negligence matter that prevented their client from incurring significant damages, including attorney’s fees. Plaintiff Susan Rae Bolton, as trustee of the Betty J. Whitlock Trust, filed a property damage lawsuit against DP Development, LLC, alleging that its asphalt paving crew negligently applied hot asphalt near a wooden garage structure during a private parking lot paving project, that caused a fire that completely consumed the attached garage structure used for storage, and caused extensive smoke and soot damage to the main structure, estimated as high as $895,000 to repair. In addition, the fire resulted in a business tenant vacating the premises, as it was no longer inhabitable for business operation.
The case was contested on both liability and damages, and consisted of 17 depositions, including multiple depositions of experts, a corporate representative for FPL, and numerous fact witnesses. Plaintiff served a PFS in October 2023, when at that time, only four depositions had been taken. The disputed issues of liability involved contested evidence regarding whether the fire started inside or outside the garage based on fire patterns, consumption rate of wood and beams, and other information. Damages was contested based on the proper measure of damages, as well as what metric for the measure of damages to use. Defendant filed a Motion in Limine requesting that the Court determined that the proper measure of damages for the real property was limited to the diminution in value, as opposed to repair and replacement costs.
The Court, the Honorable George Paulk, agreed. The only issue remaining was the proper measure of the diminution in value. Plaintiff argued that the proper measure of diminution in value was $425,000, after consideration of retroactive valuation of property preceding fire, and post-fire valuation. Defendant argued that the proper measure of diminution in value was $192,000, as estimated by the Brevard County Property Appraiser’s Office. At trial, Defense counsel got Plaintiff’s diminution in value expert to agree that the valuation of the Brevard County Property Appraiser’s Office was a legitimate metric, even if he disagreed. In addition, at trial, Defendant filed a Motion for Directed Verdict on Plaintiff’s claim of future loss business rent for failure to produce adequate document Terry evidence to support as payment of rent.
Liability was contested to the very end, with the jury asking questions of witnesses that went to the heart of liability. Plaintiff requested $495,000 from the jury. Defendant strategically conceded certain hard cost and miscellaneous damages, while challenging the diminution in value and claims of lost future rent. Ultimately, the jury returned a verdict of $369,000. This led Plaintiff’s lead counsel to request the Court poll the jury to ensure that it was everyone’s verdict.
Miami Senior Partner Anthony Perez and Junior Partner Cristina Sevilla secured final summary judgment in the matter styled Mercedes Mejia et al v. Defendant Insurance Company. Plaintiffs filed suit alleging that Defendant breached the insurance contract by denying coverage for their claim for damage to their property resulting from Tropical Storm Eta. As Plaintiffs reported their claim 1 ½ years after Tropical Storm Eta, and made repairs to the roof and interior of their property prior to reporting the claim, Defendant filed its Motion for Final Summary Judgment, arguing that Plaintiffs had failed to comply with the policy’s duties after loss, failed to provide prompt notice of the loss, and prejudiced Defendant’s investigation of the loss. Defendant’s Motion was granted, as the Court found that Defendant was entitled to a presumption of prejudice, and that Plaintiffs failed to rebut that prejudice, as the Affidavit of Guillermo Salinas on which Plaintiffs relied was conclusory, unsupported, and insufficient. Final Summary Judgment was entered in favor of Defendant. Read More.
Miami Senior Partner Anthony Perez secured a dismissal with prejudice in the matter styled Brickhouse Inspections, Inc. a/a/o Shameka Murphy v. Defendant Insurance Company. Plaintiff filed suit alleging that Defendant breached the insurance contract by denying coverage for Plaintiff’s claim for payment relating to services rendered at the insured property pursuant to an assignment of benefits. Defendant filed its Motion to Dismiss, challenging the validity of the purported assignment, contending that it failed to comply with Florida Statute §627.7152, was therefore invalid and unenforceable, and thus rendered Plaintiff without standing to maintain the lawsuit. Just minutes before the hearing on Defendant’s motion, the case was dismissed with prejudice. Read More



