Coral Gables Lawyer, Sanctioned for Bad Faith, Gets Reprieve Over Elusive Witness in Insurance Case
In a dispute with their insurance company, the plaintiffs claimed the only service address they could find for their fact witness was a Pembroke Pines UPS store mailbox, but defendant Prepared Insurance Co. alleged this was a deliberate attempt to stop the witness from being served.
June 13, 2019 at 11:59 AM
5 minute read
Coral Gables attorney Scot Strems averted sanctions in a contract dispute case as the Fourth District Court of Appeal ruled that he and two homeowner plaintiffs weren't to blame for an elusive witness who never appeared for a deposition.
In a dispute with their insurance company, the plaintiffs claimed the only service address they could find for their witness, a loss consultant, was a Pembroke Pines UPS store. But defendant Prepared Insurance Co. suggested the plaintiffs hadn't looked in earnest and alleged a deliberate attempt to stop the witness from being served.
The trial court had sided with Prepared Insurance Co., represented by Melinda S. Thornton and Scott A. Cole of Cole, Scott & Kissane in Miami and Hope C. Zelinger of Bressler, Amery & Ross in Fort Lauderdale. Broward Circuit Judge Michael L. Gates sanctioned the plaintiffs and the Strems Law Firm, striking their pleadings and hitting them with attorney fees for bad-faith litigation.
But the Fourth DCA disagreed, finding no evidence of bad faith, and ruling the plaintiffs and their counsel shouldn't have shouldered blame for the no-show witness.
“We have scoured the record and find nothing which would support the trial court's order or its decision to involuntarily dismiss the lawsuit,” the opinion said.
Plaintiffs appellate counsel Melissa A. Giasi of Sivyer Barlow & Watson in Tampa said the case is an “egregious example” of what she feels is a common problem for her clients.
“There's been a trend with certain insurance carriers, where it appears that they, through their attorneys, pursue sanctions as a dismissal, as opposed to letting a case be litigated on its merits,” Giasi said.
In Giasi's mind, it wasn't clear why the witness was important to the defense's case.
“I don't know why they were so desperate to talk to him,” she said.
Lawyers for Prepared Insurance did not respond to requests for comment by deadline.
|The deposition that never was
The case stated when homeowners Reginald Williams and Chanel Williams sued their insurer in August 2015 after they were denied coverage for $28,000 in water-pipe damage. Once retained, Strems Law Firm connected their clients with “loss consultant” Roman Rodriguez, according to Wednesday's opinion.
Rodriguez, a corporate representative from Let Us Claim Consultants Inc., ended up on both parties' witness lists for depositions. But he wasn't easy to pin down. The UPS store mailbox Rodriguez had listed as his address on his estimate proved fruitless, as did another potential address the defense found — this time in Miramar, according to the opinion.
Rodriguez's December 2015 scheduled deposition date came and went without him. The trial court issued an order to show cause, and then rescheduled the deposition, but that also yielded nothing.
Prepared Insurance moved for sanctions. It alleged the homeowners and their lawyers had failed to provide discovery and had never showed up for a deposition, along with “their own loss consultants.”
The defense also moved to compel a “better address,” accusing the homeowners of knowingly giving a useless one. As punishment, it sought fees and costs.
The case has cost thousands so far, according to plaintiffs appellate counsel Giasi, who claimed sanctions were never warranted.
“I can't tell you how many times fingers get pointed at attorneys representing the insured for not appearing at depositions,” she said. “So I liked that the court pointed out that it was not suspicious, it was perfectly reasonable for them not to go because [Rodriguez] hadn't shown up.”
Nearly two years later, in June 2017, plaintiffs lawyer Strems announced at a hearing that he'd found an Orlando address connected to Rodriguez's employer ”last night,” according to the opinion. He gave that address to the defense, but the Fourth DCA said it was “of note” that he then took Rodriguez off his witness list. The defense eventually served Rodriguez, according to the opinion, but not before trying several times to find him at the Orlando address.
Strems did not respond to a request for comment by deadline.
When Rodriguez still didn't appear for the deposition, the opinion said Judge Gates “entertained” the defendant's motion for fees, finding that the defense was prejudiced by a waste of time and resources.
Fourth DCA Judge Cory J. Ciklin penned the reversal, with Judges Carole Y. Taylor and Spencer D. Levine concurring.
|Read the court opinion:
|More on appeals:
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllBack-To-Back Hurricanes' Impact on Florida Legal Work Will Go Beyond Usual Suspects
5 minute readHolland & Knight Snags 2 Insurance Partners in New York and Philadelphia From Goodwin
3 minute readTurning the Tables: Defense Litigators Embrace Lawsuits, Alleging Fraud at Plaintiffs Shops
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1How to Support Law Firm Profitability: Train Partners Up
- 2Elon Musk Names Microsoft, Calif. AG to Amended OpenAI Suit
- 3Trump’s Plan to Purge Democracy
- 4Baltimore City Govt., After Winning Opioid Jury Trial, Preparing to Demand an Additional $11B for Abatement Costs
- 5X Joins Legal Attack on California's New Deepfakes Law
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250