JUAN RICARDO JACKSON MELENDEZ AND JESSICA SANTO RIVERA
v.
DONALD DELAND EVERSOLE AND MICHELE MARIE EVERSOLE, HIS WIFE
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.
A trial court's decision to allow amendment of a counterclaim to add punitive damages satisfies the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes, and therefore the appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review the sufficiency of evidence supporting the punitive damages claim.
[1] In reviewing a trial court's decision to allow amendment of a pleading to add a punitive damages claim under section 768.72, Florida Statutes, appellate jurisdiction is l…
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 such a proceeding, the scope of our review is limited to determining whether the trial court complied with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes. We, conversely, lack 'jurisdiction to review the sufficiency of the evidence proffered to support the punitive damages claim.'”
Court explaining the scope of review in certiorari proceedings challenging punitive damages amendments.
Petitioners Juan Ricardo Jackson Melendez and Jessica Santo Rivera sought certiorari review of a trial court order that allowed Respondents Donald Del…
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 Scope Of Certiorari Review cases and more on FLexlaw
court complied with the applicable procedural requirements, the petition for writ of certiorari is DENIED.
WOLF, OSTERHAUS, and JAY, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________ Paul M. Eza and Michael L. Glass of Stone, Glass & Connolly, LLP, Jacksonville, for Petitioners. Benjamin E. Richard, Curry G. Pajcic, and William A. Bald of Pajcic & Pajcic, P.A., Jacksonville, for Respondents.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Event Depot Corp. v. Frank, 269 So. 3d 559 (Fla. 4th DCA 2019)
-
Melendez v. Eversole, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D2519 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Globe Newspaper Co. v. King, 658 So. 2d 518 (Fla. 1995)
- Am. Heritage Life Ins. Co. v. Smith, 263 So. 3d 133 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)
- Melendez v. Eversole, 43 Fla. L. Weekly D2519 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)