Favorable Verdict

On June 12, 2002, at approximately 2:48 p.m., minor Plaintiff Natividad alleged that she was stopped at a red light on N.E. 8th Street in Homestead when Defendant's vehicle rear-ended her vehicle. The jury determined that Defendant's negligence was the legal cause of injury, loss, or damage to Plaintiff. They also determined that Jose Rivera was not entitled to any recovery for the filial consortium claim or for the loss of his daughter's services. The net verdict awarded to minor Plaintiff was $ 6,000. Minor Plaintiff asked the jury for her medical bills of $22,000, future medical expenses, future loss of earning capacity, past and future pain and suffering, and loss of support and services for her father; nevertheless the jury awarded minor Plaintiff less than her medical bills ($ 16,000). The jury also determined that Plaintiff was not entitled to any future medical bills and that she did not sustain a permanent injury. The jury was also asked to make a determination as to whether Defendant was entitled to a $ 10,000 set-off for the payable PIP benefits and awarded Defendant the $ 10,000 set-off at trial.  Read More

EPL | Employment Law, Federal Practice

Defense Verdict

This case involved a lawsuit alleging Whistleblower violations and violations of the U.S Constitution and USC 1983. Plaintiff sought relief under theories of breach of contract, declaratory relief, whistle blower protection pursuant to the Florida Statutes and denial of free speech pursuant to 42. U.S.C. 1983. Defendant moved for summary judgment which was granted as to Plaintiff's claim for breach of contract and declaratory relief. The jury returned a verdict for the Defense. The Court has denied Plaintiff's Motion for New Trial and Defendant's Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs is pending. Read More

Miehl v. Mall

Defense Verdict

On December 1, 2002, Plaintiff was at Defendant's mall in Miami. Plaintiff allegedly slipped and fell on water that had spilled on the floor. Plaintiff claimed that security knew the water was there and failed to warn. Defendant alleged that a security officer warned Plaintiff and was very vocal about it, screaming at her not to walk there. Read More

Rios v. Mall

Defense Verdict

On July 14, 2001, at approximately 2:30 p.m., Plaintiff and his wife were at Defendant's mall. While at the mall, it began to rain heavily resulting in extensive leaking in the roof of the food court. The leak extended over eight feet in length requiring three buckets and a trash can to address the growing water intrusion. Plaintiff walked near the area of the leak and slipped and fell on water that had accumulated on the tile floor. Plaintiff fell backwards, striking his head and neck on the floor. Plaintiff alleged that the mall was negligent since it had prior knowledge of the leak yet allegedly failed to take adequate measures to clearly mark the area where customers should not enter. Defendant argued that Plaintiff was himself negligent in his approach of the area in that he walked through multiple warning cones and wet floor signs. Read More

Cronin V. Mall

Favorable Verdict

On February 2, 2002, Plaintiff was on Defendant's property which was a parking lot outside of Burdine's department store at the Edison Mall in Ft. Myers. Plaintiff was walking with her sister, carrying a box, when she tripped and fell over some wood sticking up from the ground. The wood was what remained of a post from a handicapped sign; Plaintiff stated that the wood was weathered and not clearly visible. Defendant argued that Plaintiff was negligent in that she was not watching where she was walking. Read More

Court entered Judgment for Defendants

On April 14, 2002, at approximately 10:03 a.m., Plaintiff was driving north on N.W. 66th Avenue in Margate when his vehicle was struck in the front right driver's side by Defendant's vehicle. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant had negligently failed to stop, or even slow down, at a four-way stop sign causing the impact with Plaintiff's vehicle, which sustained nearly $ 12,000 in property damage. Defendants admitted liability and the case was tried solely on the issues of causation and damages.  Plaintiff asked the jury for approximately $ 27,000. Although the jury returned a verdict awarding Plaintiff less than his medical expenses, the court actually entered judgment for Defendants because the PIP set-off resulted in a net verdict of $ 0 for Plaintiff. Because of a previously filed confidential proposal for settlement, Defendant is entitled to tax costs and attorney's fees. Plaintiff demanded $ 12,000.  Read More

On October 31, 1998, Plaintiff was working as a guard in Tampa, riding in the cargo hold of an armored cash van manufactured by Defendant. Behind the guard's seat was a hollow metal bar designed to restrain the expected cargo of thirty boxes of coins (weighing approximately seven hundred pounds) and currency bags in the case of an accident. Defendant had never tested the design and did not submit the design for an engineering review. The van rear-ended a tanker in a heavy fog at a speed of approximately twenty-five mph. On impact, the cargo plowed through the metal bar with such force that it tore the seat partially off the pedestal and slammed the seat back into Plaintiff's head, breaking his neck. The case was tried on a single count of strict liability. Read More

Defense Verdict

On August 13, 2001, Plaintiff was traveling east on NW 135th Street in Miami and was stopped at a red light. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant struck her vehicle from behind causing a severe impact and approximately $ 2,500 in property damage. Plaintiff contended that, as a result of the accident, she sustained multiple cervical and lumbar herniations and a permanent injury. Defendant did not dispute liability for the accident. Plaintiff asked the jury for $ 57,048.86. Defendant is entitled to attorney's fees and costs based upon her Proposal for Settlement. Although Defendant admitted liability, the jury determined that the accident was not the legal cause of loss, injury, or damage to Plaintiff and answered "no" to question one on the verdict form. Read More

Defense Verdict

On February 1, 2001, in Naples, at approximately 3:30 p.m., Plaintiff was utilizing an upstairs entrance to Dillards from the upper deck of the mall's parking garage, when she fell over a curb outside of the Dillards' entrance. Plaintiff alleged that she was accustomed to other department stores' upstairs entrances at that mall, all of which had ramped frontage with no curbs. Plaintiff further alleged that the curb served no purpose based on engineering principles and that the presence of bollards set back thirty feet from the area of the curb created a false visual cue that any step down would be at or near the area of the bollards. Judgment for Defendant's attorney's fees and costs is pending based on Defendant prevailing on its Proposal for Settlement. Plaintiff demanded $ 282,000. Read More

On February 20, 2002, Plaintiff alleged that she was traveling east on Pines Boulevard in Pembroke Pines when she was rear-ended by Defendant's vehicle. This case was tried on liability and damages.   The court entered a directed verdict of liability against Defendant upon Plaintiff's Motion for a Directed Verdict. Because the parties had stipulated that Defendant was entitled to a $ 10,000 PIP set-off, the net verdict was "0." Defendant will be entitled to tax costs and attorney's fees pursuant to final judgment that will be entered in Defendant's favor. Read More

Rigaud v. Bakery Associates, Ltd.

RESULT

On May 21, 2000, Defendants owned a shopping center called the Shops at Sunset Place in South Miami. Plaintiffs alleged that Defendants negligently maintained the main public outdoor stairway by blocking the bottom of the stairway with tables and planters, thus preventing the use of handrails along the stairway. Plaintiff alleged that as she was descending the stairway and approaching the obstruction, she was forced to let go of the handrail and awkwardly descend the remaining steps to reach the bottom of the stairway. Plaintiff fell while trying to descend the remaining steps. Plaintiffs claimed that Defendants were in violation of the Florida Building Code and the National Fire Protection Act. Defendants did not dispute the obstruction, but alleged that Plaintiff should have been able to walk down on her own. Read More

Defense Verdict

No on causation after getting hit for liability. Plaintiff asked the jury for $940,000. Plaintiff was a 48-yearold mother of three, left work at 4:30 p.m. by taking the 6th floor stairway. She fell coming down the stairs after passing the 5th floor. The stairs were being painted by our client and it was admitted Plaintiff fell due to a dangerous condition of wet paint. The Plaintiff claimed serious injuries, including a back surgery, urological problems and years of rehabilitation. The trial lasted 5-days and 11 experts testified. Plaintiff sought 4 years of lost wages ($120,000), past medicals ($70,000), future surgery and rehabilitative costs ($150,000) and an additional $600,000 in past and future pain and suffering. The Jury granted a defense verdict, agreeing with us that the accident was not the legal cause of injury to the Plaintiff. Plaintiff’s lowest demand at trial was $700,000. The defense is also entitled to costs and attorneys fees due to a rejected 6-figure Proposal for Settlement. Read More

Defense Verdict

On February 10, 1999, at 7:00 p.m., Plaintiff was shocked by a four-hundred and eighty volt electrical wire servicing the light poles on the senior field of Defendant Azalea Little League in St. Petersburg. Plaintiff claimed that he had no memory of the manner in which he came into contact with the wire. Plaintiff alleged that Azalea Little League was negligent for allowing a dangerous condition to exist on the premises and that the electrician, Defendant Collins, was also negligent for failing to repair the wire sooner and failing to inspect the field before energizing the wire. Defendants contended and proved at trial that they had no prior knowledge of any dangerous condition and Plaintiff himself knew of the condition and voluntarily exposed himself to the danger by grabbing the wire with his thumb and forefinger. Plaintiff's damages were also disputed. Defendants filed a Proposal for Settlement to Plaintiff Martin for $ 9,000 and to Plaintiff Lynn for $ 1,000. Plaintiffs would not consider any offer below $ 100,000. With pain and suffering, Plaintiffs demanded approximately $ 400,000.  Read More

Defense Verdict

On March 1, 2002, Plaintiff was robbed in Defendant's parking lot on N. Federal Highway in Ft. Lauderdale. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant failed to provide her with reasonable and adequate security on said evening. After returning from dinner at a nearby restaurant with her sister, Plaintiff parked her vehicle near the rear entrance to the hotel in a handicapped parking space. After exiting her vehicle, she was accosted by an unknown assailant who grabbed her purse and dragged her along the parking lot for approximately ten feet until he was able to obtain her purse. He left the premises in a vehicle. Plaintiff established that Defendant only had two security employees for the parking lot and five story hotel structure; however, neither security employees were working at the time of the incident. The jury found that there was no negligence on the part of Defendant which was a legal cause of damage to Plaintiff. Plaintiff has no post-trial motions pending. Read More

Read c. Taylor

PRACTICE AREA

Motion for Summary Judgment (Appeal, 2002) 

SUMMARY. Read More

Harriman v. Garlock

PRACTICE AREA

(Appeal, 1996)

SUMMARY. Read More

Holbrook v. Defendant Premises Owner

PRACTICE AREA

Petitions Denied

Appeals to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, Florida Supreme Court, and Supreme Court of the United States. Read More