Skip to main content

verdicts

Case:
Plaintiff, as Personal Representative of the Estate of  Plaintiff Decedent v. Defendant Retail Mall and Co-Defendant Driver
Practice Area:
Premise Liability; Wrongful Death
Attorney(s):
Plaintiff Counsel:
Eriksen Law Firm (Michael D. Eriksen); Crary Buchanan (David Knight)
Co-Defendant Counsel:
Sellars, Marion & Bachi, P.A. (Lauri A. Primus, Co-Defendant Counsel on behalf of Driver)
Result:
Complete Defense Verdict
Summary:
Defense Verdict | Decedent 62 Year Old | Wrongful Death Defendant Mall Parking Lot  
 
Founding Partner Jack D. Luks, Esq., and Senior Partner Allison I. Janowitz, Esq., obtained a full defense verdict on February 2, 2024 in a wrongful death action styled Plaintiff, as Personal Representative of the Estate of  Plaintiff Decedent v. Defendant Retail Mall and  Co-Defendant Driver. The lawsuit arose out of an accident that occurred on December 24, 2020 in the Defendant Retail Mall's parking lot. The decedent was severely injured when a vehicle made a left turn from the inner perimeter road into a parking aisle striking the decedent while he was walking across the parking aisle. Due to the injuries he sustained, the decedent did not regain consciousness and  passed away several days later.

Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant – our client – Mall negligently maintained its parking lot area and, as a result, was the direct cause of the incident. In arguments, Plaintiff attempted to establish liability based on failure to have additional crosswalks, stops signs and other safety traffic control devices in its parking lot. Nonetheless, in depositions, it was established that the Co-Defendant driver, was at a complete stop prior to making the left turn and was also familiar with the parking lot layout as he had been visiting the Mall since 1987. This key testimony aided in dismantling Plaintiff’s theory that the Mall was negligent in its design of its parking lot, which was the cause of the accident and injuries alleged.  The Mall argued that the inclusion of most of the traffic control devices recommended by the Plaintiff’s liability experts would not have altered the outcome of the accident.

Further, Defense expert, Roland Lamb, testified that based on his expertise and experience, the parking lot design was reasonable. Despite naming the driver as a Co-Defendant, Plaintiff's counsel continued to argue that the driver should not bear any responsibility for the accident and solely focused Plaintiff's case on the Mall as the responsible party.  Trial partners Jack D. Luks, and Allison I. Janowitz highlighted this fact coupled with their position that the Mall was not negligent in its parking lot design and/or it was not a legal cause of the accident.

Following closing arguments, the jury deliberated for two hours and returned a complete Defense verdict establishing that Defendant Mall and Co-Defendant driver were not the legal cause of loss or damage.

Case:
Gandy, Anthony v. Florida Mall
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Dismissal Based on Fraud on the Court
Summary:

On December 10, 2020, Founding Partner Jack Luks, Esq., and Junior Partner Allison Janowitz, Esq., prevailed on a Motion to Strike Plaintiff’s Pleadings based on Fraud on the Court in Gandy, Anthony v. Florida Mall. This case arose out of a trip and fall in the parking lot of Florida Mall on December 23, 2017. Plaintiff asserted that Florida Mall failed to maintain the parking lot in a reasonably safe condition, resulting in Plaintiff’s injuries to his right shoulder, right knee, and lumbar spine. Plaintiff claimed medical damages of about $100,000 as a result of the fall. Throughout the investigation of the claim, the Defense found multiple surgeries on Plaintiff’s right knee that were not disclosed during deposition or discovery. Further, Plaintiff failed to disclose two subsequent incidents where he was admitted to the hospital complaining of pain in his right shoulder.

The Court found that the Plaintiff’s misrepresentations regarding the extent of his injuries, the limitations that had previously been attributed to other injuries, as well as failing to disclose the surgeries and post-accident falls, were intentional and that the misrepresentations were a scheme to mislead the Court. Accordingly, the Court granted the Motion for Dismissal based upon Fraud on the Court. Read more

Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Favorable Verdict
Summary:

Founding Partner Jack Luks and Associate Allison Janowitz received a $4,500 net verdict on a slip and fall matter styled  Michelle Santovito v. Defendant Store on October 21, 2016. Defense served a Proposal For Settlement and has filed a Motion for Entitlement of Attorneys’ Fees and Court Costs.  Plaintiff Santovito, was walking in Defendant Store when she stepped in a liquid substance, and slipped and fell several steps later. Read More

Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:

Founding Partner Jack Luks and Senior Partner David Lipkin received a defense verdict in the premises liability matter styled Felipe Ernani vs. Mynt Holding Co., LLC. on March 9, 2016. Mynt lounge was the only remaining defendant, both the city and the police officers settled out of this case several years ago. The plaintiffs alleged that as the police officers were off duty and working for Mynt as specially assigned off duty police officers paid for by Mynt, that Mynt was responsible for their conduct. Read More

Case:
Leon, Arthur vs. Simon Property Group, Inc. d/b/a Sawgrass Mills Mall
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Motion for Final Summary Judgment
Summary:
SUMMARY. Read More
Case:
Sherif Kodsy (Plaintiff/Appellee) v. Christian and Patricia Berian (Defendants/Appellants)
Practice Area:
PRACTICE AREA
Attorney(s):
Result:
Dismissal of Third Amended Complaint with prejudice
Summary:
Dismissal of Third Amended Complaint with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action, April 6, 2011. Lemon Law, Fourth District Court of Appeal, 17th Judicial Circuit, Broward County, Jack Luks and Alison Marshall. Read More
Case:
Bonnie Dehler v. Coral Square Mall
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:
Slip and Fall, Broward County, Jack Luks and David Lipkin. Defense Verdict, 3/10/11. Read More
Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:

Slip and Fall, Lee County, Jack Luks and David Lipkin, Defense Verdict, 12/7/2010. Read More

Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Summary Judgment
Summary:

Trip and Fall, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida, Summary Judgment, Jack Luks and David Lipkin, 12/6/2010. Read More

Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Partial Summary Judgment
Summary:
Bruno v. Defendant Store, Wrongful Death, Palm Beach County, Jack D. Luks and Zeb I. Goldstein, Partial Summary Judgment, May 7, 2010. Read More
Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Favorable Verdict
Summary:
SUMMARY. Read More
Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:
Defense verdict Palm Beach County (6/10/09) for slip and fall (water spill) incident that occurred on “Black Friday”, November 28, 2003 in the food court of Defendant Mall. Plaintiff requested $1.2M during closing arguments, representing compensation for wage losses, medical bills, future medical treatment and pain and suffering. The case, originally tried in January 2009, resulted in a mistrial. Following the first trial, the Defendant filed a Proposal for Settlement to Plaintiffs, which was rejected by virtue of Plaintiffs' failure to accept same within 30 days of service. Plaintiff's injury was limited to her right knee, including ACL and MCL tears which eventually resulted in surgery in September 2007. Read More
Case:
Leads v. Mall
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:
Leads v. Mall, Pinellas County, Defense Verdict 11/13/2008. Read More
Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:

Jack Luks, Partner and Carl Christy, Associate received a defense verdict September 18, 2007 on a Slip & Fall incident. Plaintiff while visiting Defendant's movie theater on August 1, 2003, proceeded to the restroom and alleged that she slipped and fell while descending a ramp within the auditorium.  The Plaintiff further contended that there was a greasy, slippery substance on the floor in the seating area that transferred to the soles of her shoes.  Additionally, she  contended that the lighting was inadequate and the subject ramp violated the Florida Building Code.  Plaintiff had herniated disc at L4-5 and L5-S1 resulting in a double fusion, right knee surgery and right shoulder dislocation.  Plaintiff incurred $63K in medical expenses and claimed $370K in lost pension benefits, earnings and earning capacity. Plaintiff asked the jury for $633K ($433K for medicals and lost wages/loss of earning capacity). Read More

Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:
Plaintiff sued the Coca Cola Co. for negligence and sought $1M. Around May 4, 2001, Plaintiff, a Shoreline Transportation employed 18-wheel truck driver in his 40's, picked up multiple 1,000 pound canisters of Coca Cola syrup in Atlanta to deliver to Pompano Beach, FL. Traveling southbound on I-95, Plaintiff first stopped at his home in Hialeah, FL before making the trip back north to Pompano Beach. Near the I-95, Copans Road exit, Plaintiff got a flat tire. As he brought the truck to a stop, the syrup canisters came crashing through the front of the trailer and into the cabin. Plaintiff alleged to have suffered herniated disc at L4-5, which required two surgeries. Plaintiff initially filed a $26K wage loss claim, the result of 13 months he claimed he could not work. Read More
Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Favorable Verdict
Summary:
The Plaintiff, an employee of Automated Plastics Group Industry, was operating an extruder machine when his arm was drawn into rollers associated with the machine’s take off unit. The Plaintiff asked the Jury for $3.7M ($678,000 in specials; $3M in pain and suffering). The jury found Plaintiff 75% comparative negligence. The Defendant was entitled to a $1.12M set-off for a prior settlement and therefore the Plaintiff took nothing in this action. Read More
Case:
Ilse Contin v. Store
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:
Plaintiff alleged that after selecting stain remover from a shelf, she tripped over cans of paint that had been placed behind her by a store employee who was stacking the shelves on the opposite side of the aisle. At trial, Plaintiff claimed $53K in past medical bills, $413K in future medical bills, $3.6 million in past and future lost wages, and unspecified past and future pain and suffering. The Plaintiff’s fall was observed by a (now former) store employee. The store employee testified that due to the Plaintiff’s high heels, the Plaintiff tripped over her own feet after removing an item from the shelf. The store employee testified that he had observed the Plaintiff since she entered the aisle, and was approximately six feet away when he saw her trip over her own feet. He stated that at that time, he was “facing” products on the other side of the aisle. The store manager, came to the aisle to attend to the Plaintiff after her fall and has testified that he did not observe any merchandise on the floor. Read More
Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:
Jack D. Luks, Partner received a defense verdict on behalf of the Defendant Restaurant. Plaintiff alleged that on February 21, 2003, while she was walking from the lower parking of the Sea Watch Restaurant toward the main entrance, her path was obstructed by a vehicle that was parked by the valet personnel employed by the restaurant. The obstruction forced the Plaintiff to take an alternate route, walking on a sandy, rocky area. The Plaintiff contends that her foot sunk into the ground enough to cause her to lose her balance and fall, sustaining a non-displaced fracture of the right ankle. Plaintiff demanded $400K and alleged that the Defendant created a dangerous condition, thereby causing injury to the Plaintiff. Jack Luks, on behalf of the Defendant Restaurant denied the allegations in the Complaint and alleged that the Plaintiff was comparatively negligent. Read More
Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:
Jack D. Luks, Partner and Todd T. Springer, Managing Attorney (i.e., Jacksonville Office) received a defense verdict on behalf of Defendant Mall. At trial, the Plaintiff asked the jury for approximately $3.1M. The Plaintiff alleged that while she was walking out of the Orange Park Mall, she tripped over a deviation in the slabs of sidewalk at the food court patio. The Plaintiff alleged that the mall negligently maintained the sidewalk where the accident took place and failed to warn the Plaintiff of the dangerous condition. Read More
Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
RESULT
Summary:
SUMMARY. Read More
Case:
Miehl v. Mall
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:
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
Case:
Cronin V. Mall
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Favorable Verdict
Summary:
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
Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Attorney(s):
Result:
The case ultimately settled for less than the verdict.
Summary:
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
Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:
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
Case:
Rigaud v. Bakery Associates, Ltd.
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
RESULT
Summary:
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
Case:
Practice Area:
Attorney(s):
Result:
Defense Verdict
Summary:
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