20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 804a
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2008BATIInsurance — Discovery — Depositions — Failure to comply — Sanctions — Mere filing of motion to stay does not allow insurer to ignore requests for deposition dates — Moreover, where motion to stay was not filed until after medical provider made multiple requests for dates, unilaterally scheduled deposition and filed motion to compel, plaintiff is entitled to attorney’s fees and costs
ALTAMONTE SPRINGS DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING, INC. d/b/a MID FLORIDA IMAGING a/a/o ANDY BATISTA, Plaintiff, v. PEAK PROPERTY AND CASUALTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Defendant. County Court, 9th Judicial Circuit in and for Orange County. Case No. 12-SC-6176-O. May 21, 2013. Honorable Faye L. Allen, Judge. Counsel: Chad A. Barr, Eiffert & Associates, P.A., Orlando, for Plaintiff. Miguel Roura, Banker Lopez Gassler, P.A., St. Petersburg, for Defendant.
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPELDEPOSITION OF THE DEFENDANT’S CORPORATEREPRESENTATIVE and MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
THIS MATTER came before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel the Deposition of the Defendant’s Corporate Representative and, being considered by the Court and otherwise being fully advised of the premises; it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel is hereby GRANTED. The deposition of the Defendant’s Corporate Representative shall take place on or before June 15, 2013. The Defendant’s Corporate Representative is not required to appear in Orange County.
2. Plaintiff’s Request for Sanctions contained within its Motion to Compel is also GRANTED. The Defendant disregarded Plaintiff’s multiple requests for depositions dates of the Defendant’s Corporate Representative. The Plaintiff was left with no option but to unilaterally schedule the deposition of the Defendant’s Corporate Representative, file a motion to compel, set the motion to compel for hearing, attend a hearing, and obtain an order on same. Defendant’s counsel’s argument that deposition dates were not given because of the Defendant’s motion to stay are not well taken. First, the mere filing of a motion to stay does not allow a litigant to ignore discovery requests absent a court order granting the stay. Second, the Defendant’s motion to stay was not filed until after the Plaintiff made its multiple requests for deposition dates, Defendant’s motion to stay was not filed until after the Plaintiff unilaterally scheduled the deposition of the Defendant’s Corporate Representative, and Defendant’s Motion to Stay was not filed until after the Plaintiff filed its Motion to Compel the Deposition of the Defendant’s Corporate Representative. Based on the foregoing, and pursuant to Rule 1.380 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, the Plaintiff is entitled to sanctions in the form of attorney’s fees and costs for the efforts expended in attempting to set the deposition of the Defendant’s Corporate Representative, unilaterally setting the deposition of the Defendant’s Corporate Representative, filing the subject motion to compel, and obtaining an order on same. Plaintiff shall coordinate an evidentiary hearing on the amount Plaintiff seeks in attorneys fees and costs.
* * *
