fbpx

Volume 26

Case Search

SOUTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT (a/a/o Walker, James 2), Plaintiff, v. GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 46a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2601JWALInsurance — Personal injury protection — Discovery — Failure to comply — Sanctions — Insurer’s failure to respond to requests for discovery, respond to motions to compel discovery, provide deposition dates after cancellation of deposition of its corporate representative and comply with order setting status conference requiring that counsel be fully versed on status of case results in striking of insurer’s pleadings and entry of judgment in favor of medical provider where insurer’s lack of cooperation was willful and contumacious, insurer was involved in failure to cooperate, lack of cooperation has prejudiced provider and created significant problems of judicial administration, and insurer’s inaction in case evinces willful and deliberate decision to abandon case

Read More »

OBRIAN FRAZER and LATOYA BYFIELD, Plaintiffs, v. AVATAR PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 21a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2601FRAZInsurance — Property — Discovery — Failure to comply — Sanctions — Monetary sanction equal to amount claimed by insureds in damages for alleged water loss is imposed on insureds’ counsel and his law firm jointly and severally and case is dismissed with prejudice as sanction for misconduct where insureds did not provide notice of loss until forty days after alleged loss; allegedly failed parts were discarded, thousands of dollars of repairs were allegedly performed before loss was reported, and no photographs or videotapes were taken of loss; insureds did not provide sworn proof of loss; neither insureds, their counsel nor their public adjuster appeared for scheduled examinations under oath; insureds did not respond to discovery for over five months and then provided response that was grossly deficient, mendacious and unverified; and insureds failed to participate in first scheduled depositions, and their counsel engaged in obstructionist conduct throughout second depositions ordered by court

Read More »

ISO DIAGNOSTIC TESTING INC., a/a/o Marie Guillaume, Plaintiff(s) v. USAA GENERAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, Defendant(s).

26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 897b

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2611GUILInsurance — Personal injury protection — Discovery — Depositions — Motion to compel deposition of corporate representative of claims management company who made determination that more documentation was needed for insured’s PIP claim is denied where discovery insured seeks is not relevant to issue of whether insurer’s explanation of reimbursement informing insured that additional documentation was needed to make reimbursement decision constituted request for documentation under section 627.736(6)(b) — Even if court found that EOR contained 6(b) request for documentation, requested deposition would not be relevant as testimony of employee of company is not binding on insurer

Read More »

CIELO SPORTS & FAMILY CHIROPRACTIC CENTRE, LLC., a/a/o Bryan Pennington, Plaintiff, v. USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 687a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2608PENNInsurance — Discovery — Depositions — Plaintiff has right to take deposition of corporate representative who filed affidavit in support of summary judgment — Plaintiff’s motion to continue summary judgment hearing is granted, and insurer’s motion for protective order regarding deposition is denied

Read More »
Skip to content