11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 335b
Insurance — Discovery — Depositions — Motion for protective order to prevent plaintiff from asking deposition questions about claims adjusters’ financial stake in limiting claims they pay is granted in part by limiting questions only to that portion of compensation package pertaining to bonuses or other compensation based on savings derived from adjusters’ actions or inactions on claims
GINA MELOSKIE, Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 1st Judicial Circuit in and for Escambia County, Civil Division. Case No. 2003 SC 004370. Division V. January 27, 2004. Patricia A. Kinsey, Judge. Counsel: Craig B. Morris, for Defendant. B. Kristian Rasmussen, III, McDonald, Fleming, Moorhead, Ferguson, Green, Smith, Blankenship & Heath, LLP, Pensacola, for Plaintiff.
ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER IN PART
At a hearing in open court on January 26, 2004, the court heard the argument of counsel, reviewed their submitted case law and the file and now finds as follows:
Plaintiff learned that defendant’s insurance adjusters’ compensation package is directly related to the “savings” the adjusters produce for the company. Plaintiff seeks to depose that person with Progressive who can discuss the details of this component of the compensation package. Defendant argues that this information is irrelevant at this time citing State Farm v. Gallmon, 835 So.2d 389 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003).
Plaintiff argues the Gallmon holding is distinguishable based on, among other reasons, the plaintiff in Gallmon attempted to gather a wide variety of documents which they would review in an attempt to find some potential problem or issue. Here the plaintiff wants to verify the specific information that Progressive’s insurance adjusters have a personal financial stake in limiting the claims they pay which would be proper impeachment of the witness at trial. The court agrees that the Gallmon case is distinguishable and therefore it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that defendant’s Motion for a Protective Order is granted in part. Plaintiff may depose Progressive’s employee only as to that portion of the compensation package pertaining to a bonus or other compensation available to an adjuster based on savings derived from the adjuster’s actions and/or inactions pertaining to a claim.
* * *
