Coca Cola truck. Photo: Sergio TB/Shutterstock.com Coca-Cola truck. Photo: Sergio TB/Shutterstock.com

Coca-Cola Refreshments USA Inc. will have to fight a negligence suit in Miami-Dade Circuit Court after a Florida appellate panel's order negated a summary judgment entered for the company.

The Third DCA ruled in favor of Corinna Clarke in her litigation with the company Wednesday. Clarke had originally filed suit against Coca-Cola Refreshments —  a bottler responsible for distributing the Coca-Cola Co.'s products — and Kenroy Buckle, a driver employed by the company, in December 2016.

According to Clarke's amended complaint, Buckle was driving a Coca-Cola Refreshments-owned 2007 Freightliner that collided with another vehicle and subsequently crashed into the plaintiff's Miami-Dade residence May 10, 2013. The incident allegedly took place while Buckle was on the job, and Clarke contended the crash displaced her, and rendered the property uninhabitable.

Clarke pursued legal action and damages against the distributor after a lawsuit filed by her relative, Angela Clarke-Morales, was voluntarily dismissed on the eve of trial. The company fought the suit and objected to the plaintiff's efforts to depose Buckle, arguing that he had already sat for two depositions and had complied with numerous discovery requests from the preceding lawsuit concerning the crash.

The trial court granted Coca-Cola Refreshment's motion for protective order regarding Buckle's deposition in February 2018 and later entered a summary judgment on behalf of the company May 21, 2018.

Read the appellate order:

Clarke appealed both the protective order and the summary judgment to the Third DCA. Although the appellate panel sympathized with "the practical efficiencies the trial court sought to advance," the opinion concluded the lower court "did not sufficiently consider and balance Clarke's due process right to full discovery."

"The trial court recognized a hardship on Mr. Buckle to sit for another deposition, only to be questioned by the same attorney who had deposed him twice already," the opinion said in reference to Clarke's legal counsel, Miami attorney Luis Frank Navarro.

Clarke's attorney, a Navarro McKown partner, also represented the plaintiff's family in the preceding lawsuit against Coca-Cola Refreshments.

"That a material witness has undergone extensive questioning in an earlier deposition in a related case is not a justification under the facts of this case to deny Clarke the opportunity to probe further," the opinion continued. "The mere existence of a deposition transcript from an earlier lawsuit involving similar issues does not necessarily preclude a new deposition of a material witness."

The Third DCA continued, "While we acknowledge both the hardship on Mr. Buckle to sit for another deposition and the trial court's goal of judicial efficiency, Clarke is entitled to a thorough preparation of her case, including her taking Mr. Buckle's deposition." The opinion declined to consider the merits of Clarke's appeal of the summary judgment, as the appellate court's "reversal of the protective order herein necessitates reversal of the summary judgment."

Navarro did not return requests for comment by press time. He is also representing another resident of the home, Junae Clarke-Morales, in a negligence suit against Coca-Cola Refreshments and Buckle. The May 2017 complaint in Junae Clarke-Morales' case claims the company is liable for permanent injuries she and her son suffered in the crash.

Weinberg, Wheeler, Hudgins, Gunn & Dial partner Kate Spinelli is listed as Coca-Cola Refreshment's legal counsel in court papers. She did not respond to press inquires by deadline.

Related stories:

Group Seeks More Change From Pepsi On Carcinogen

Coca-Cola, ABA Accused of Tobacco-Like Deception in Lawsuit