JILL R. MCGRAIL
v.
U.S. BANK, N.A., ETC.
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The trial court's summary judgment in favor of U.S. Bank was properly entered and affirmed.
[1] A civil action becomes moot when a defendant's unaccepted offer of judgment results in a final judgment of no liability, precluding any actual controversy for judicial de…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“In any civil action for damages filed in the courts of this state, if a defendant files an offer of judgment which is not accepted by the plaintiff within 30 days, the defendant shall be entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney's fees . . . if the judgment is one of no liability or the judgment obtained by the plaintiff is at least 25 percent less than such offer.”
Citation to Fla. Stat. § 768.79(1) (2024) regarding offer of judgment provisions
Jill R. McGrail filed a civil action for damages against U.S. Bank, N.A. in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court. U.S. Bank filed an offer of judgment that…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Civil Action For Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal Stateof Florida Opinion filed October 22, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. No. 3D24-0864 Lower Tribunal No. 21-20012-CA-01 Jill R. McGrail, Appellant, vs. U.S. Bank, N.A., etc., Appellee. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lisa S. Walsh, Judge. Kaplan Zeena LLP, James M. Kaplan, and Steven A. Colsky, for appellant. Levine Kellogg Lehman Schneider + Grossman LLP, and Matthew J. McGuane; McGlinchey Stafford, and Kimberly Held Israel (Jacksonville), for appellee. Before FERNANDEZ, LINDSEY and GOODEN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Navarro v. Borges, 388 So. 3d 1044, 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA
2024) (stating that this Court reviews the trial court’s entry of summary judgment de novo); § 768.79(1), Fla. Stat. (2024) (“In any civil action for damages filed in the courts of this state, if a defendant files an offer of judgment which is not accepted by the plaintiff within 30 days, the defendant shall be entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney's fees . . . if the judgment is one of no liability or the judgment obtained by the plaintiff is at least 25 percent less than such offer[.]” (emphasis added)); Godwin v. State, 593 So. 2d 211, 212 (Fla. 1992) (“An issue is moot when the controversy has been so fully resolved that a judicial determination can have no actual effect. A case is ‘moot’ when it presents no actual controversy or when the issues have ceased to exist. Black's Law Dictionary 1008 (6th ed.1990). A moot case generally will be dismissed.” (internal citations omitted)).
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Sallas v. State, 593 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 1992)
- Claudio Navarro v. Borges, 388 So. 3d 1044 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)