Anticipation Of Litigation

113 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Ruby Tuesday, Inc. v. Metalonis
  225 So. 3d 397· Fla. 5th DCA· 2017-08-25
  Ruby Tuesday and Catherine Anderson challenged an order compelling production of an incident report created after a patron allegedly was injured by a collapsing chair. The Florida appellate court held that the incident report was protected attorney work product because it was pre
• Medina v. Am. Airlines & Sedgwick CMS
  209 So. 3d 61· Fla. 1st DCA· 2016-12-21
  In a workers' compensation case, the Florida First District Court of Appeal held that a video of an independent medical examination commissioned by the claimant's counsel constitutes attorney work product and that the claimant had not waived the work product privilege by merely i
• Justice v. Rheem Mfg. Co.
  269 F.R.D. 95· S.D. Fla.· 2016-04-27
  The court denied the motion for class certification because the proposed class was not ascertainable and common issues did not predominate over individual ones, particularly for the FDUTPA and unjust enrichment claims.
• Holbourn v. NCL (Bahamas) Ltd.
  260 F. Supp. 784· S.D. Fla.· 2014-09-26
  The court held that the CCTV videos are not protected by the work product privilege and denied the defendant's motion to delay production until after the plaintiff's deposition.
• Dopson-Troutt v. Novartis Pharms. Corp.
  251 F.R.D. 645· M.D. Fla.· 2013-09-13
  The court held that subpoenas served on a corporation's registered agent for individual employees residing outside the court's subpoena power are improper, and Rule 30(b)(6) does not apply to trial subpoenas.
• Royal Bahamian Ass'n v. QBE Ins.
  233 F.R.D. 306· S.D. Fla.· 2010-09-03
  The court held that QBE failed to establish the work-product doctrine for documents created before the lawsuit was filed, but that QBE need not produce contracts with its agents or all attorney coverage opinions.
• Marco's Franchising, LLC v. Marco's Italian Express, Inc.
  192 F.R.D. 552· M.D. Fla.· 2007-03-06
  The court held that the amended complaint substituting a successor entity as plaintiff relates back to the original filing date, and thus the defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of standing is denied.
• Alexander v. Carnival Corp.
  190 F.R.D. 640· S.D. Fla.· 2006-11-07
  The court held that accident reports prepared by a cruise line concerning passenger slip-and-fall incidents are protected by the work product privilege because their primary motivating purpose was to aid in possible future litigation.
• 1620 Health P'rs, L.C. v. Fluitt
  830 So. 2d 935· Fla. 4th DCA· 2002-11-20
  A nursing home challenged a discovery order requiring production of incident reports, asserting work product and statutory privileges. The appellate court granted the petition, quashed the order, and held that incident reports are discoverable only upon a showing of specific need
• Judge
  Del. Super. Ct.· 1993-10-06
  The court held that contemporaneous statements prepared by hospital staff members regarding an incident are discoverable under the work-product doctrine, Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(3), upon a showing of substantial need and inability to obtain the substantial equivalent by other means
• James S. Turner & the Hertz Corp. v. State
  478 So. 2d 362· Fla. 5th DCA· 1985-09-26
• United States v. Gulf OIL Corp.
  760 F.2d 292· Temp. Emer. Ct. App.· 1985-03-29
  The court held that documents prepared in anticipation of litigation are protected by the work product doctrine, but documents prepared primarily for business purposes, such as financial audits, are not, even if related to litigation.
• Hosp. Corp. OF Am. v. Dixon
  330 So. 2d 737· Fla. 1st DCA· 1976-04-28
  Hospital's petition for certiorari denied; trial court properly ordered production of incident reports without requiring plaintiff to show need, as hospital failed to establish the reports were privileged work product prepared in anticipation of litigation.