28 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 419a
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2805ESTR
Insurance — Discovery — Failure to comply — Sanctions
MANUEL V. FEIJOO, M.D. et al., a/a/o Joaquin Estrada, Plaintiff, v. STAR CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County. Case No. 2016-004946-SP-25, Section CG02. July 2, 2020. Elijah A. Levitt, Judge. Counsel: Maylin Castaneda and Kenneth B. Schurr, for Plaintiff. Jordan Berman and Susan Steakley, for Defendant.
ORDER FINDING PLAINTIFF’S ENTITLEMENT TO ATTORNEY’S FEES FOR VIOLATION OFMULTIPLE COURT ORDERS
This cause came before the Court on June 29, 2020, on Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions for violation of the Court’s April 3, 2020, Order, and the Court being advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED that, pursuant to the April 3, 2020, Order and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.380, Plaintiff is entitled to recover its reasonable attorney’s fees for all violations of court orders necessitating the May 20, 2020, Motion Sanctions for Violation of the April 3, 2020, Order. In support of this Order, the Court provides the following:
1. On April 3, 2020, the parties entered into an Agreed Order whereby the parties agreed to the following:
Defendant shall produce the responsive documents to Plaintiff’s First Request for Production and provide a better response to item #2b, and provide better verified answers to Plaintiff’s Second Set of Interrogatories on or by April 30, 2020. If Defendant fails to comply with the foregoing, then this Court shall conduct an evidentiary hearing as to the amount of sanctions to be awarded to the Plaintiff.
2. Defendant did not comply with this Order. Defendant provided no discovery by the April 30, 2020, deadline. On May 1, 2020, the record reflects that Defendant only responded to the court ordered discovery, in part, because Plaintiff filed another Motion to Compel compliance with another court order. By the terms of the April 3, 2020, Order, the Court “shall conduct an evidentiary hearing” as to the amount of reasonable attorney’s fees to be paid to Plaintiff.
3. The Court also finds entitlement to reasonable attorney’s fees under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.380. For each order that Defendant violated that is connected to the May 20, 2020, Motion, the Court will award Plaintiff’s reasonable attorney’s fees. The Court finds that the interests of justice are served by this Order and the failure to respond to the discovery was unjustified. This case is now four years old and discovery remains outstanding due to Defendant’s unreasonable delay in providing discovery. Defendant’s actions have negatively impacted the proper administration of justice through Defendant’s failure to provide discovery as required by the Court and the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Sanctions in the form of Plaintiff’s reasonable attorney’s fees are appropriate in this case.
4. Defendant is advised that future violations of Court orders may result in further sanctions, including the striking of Defendant’s pleadings and entry of judgment for Plaintiff. See Kozel v. Ostendorf, 629 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1993).
5. Any other judgment awarding fees to Plaintiff at the conclusion of, or during, this case will not include the amount resulting from this Order. Plaintiff will not obtain a duplicate recovery of its fees under section 627.428, Florida Statutes, or other applicable rule or statute.
