South Florida Law Firm Dodges Nearly $23,000 Sanction Over Misconduct in Insurance Suit
This insurance lawsuit morphed into a different kind of fight after the plaintiffs and their lawyer allegedly neglected the case and failed to show up to depositions.
June 03, 2020 at 05:23 PM
4 minute read
A Coral Gables law firm hit with sanctions over misconduct in an insurance lawsuit received a partial reprieve Wednesday when the Fourth District Court of Appeal overturned $22,877 in sanctions.
The appellate panel agreed the case should be dismissed as punishment but found the trial court shouldn't have gone a step further by imposing monetary sanctions.
Gregory Saldamando of the Strems Law Firm in Coral Gables represented plaintiffs Obrian Frazer and Latoya Byfield in their 2016 Broward Circuit lawsuit against Avatar Property & Casualty Insurance Co. over coverage of $22,877 in water damage.
But the lawsuit morphed into a different kind of fight after the plaintiffs and their lawyer allegedly neglected the case and failed to show up to scheduled events, and the defendant moved to dismiss with prejudice.
According to Broward Circuit Judge Carlos Rodriguez's sanctions order, the plaintiffs didn't comply with their insurer's policies on notifying of a loss and supplying proof. And attorney Saldamando missed deadlines for discovery requests, repeatedly "did nothing" in response to motions, and along with his clients and experts, failed to show up at depositions, according to the order.
Dismissing the suit, Rodriguez ordered additional sanctions for bad faith, noting that, "the conduct appears attorney-driven" and "the prejudice to the defense has been extreme, rendering them totally unable to defend the case."
Saldamando offered no justification, according to the trial court, "other than an obvious, and observed by the court, in the courtroom, animosity towards the defense."
But that was the wrong call, according to the Fourth DCA, which found the extra sanctions were improper. The sanctions violated due process, and no one had requested them, the appellate panel found.
"Because the trial court awarded relief not sought, and without notice, it did not comply with due process," the opinion said.
With no Florida case law to go from, the appellate panel looked to a case in the Arkansas Supreme Court, Williams v. Martin, which reversed sanctions against an attorney in 1998 because the client hadn't sought them and could have filed a malpractice lawsuit over any misconduct.
The appellate panel also found Rodriguez "improperly prejudged" the merits of the lawsuit by awarding the sanctions because it "presupposes that the clients would have prevailed on the merits of their lawsuit and as such would be entitled to the entire $22,877.02 in damages."
Melissa A. Giasi of Giasi Law in Tampa represents Strems Law Firm and Saldamando. She said they were disappointed with the ruling. Plaintiffs Frazer and Byfield also filed a separate appeal, but the Fourth DCA affirmed Wednesday without an opinion.
"My clients felt that the sanction of dismissal was unwarranted, and wanted to do what they could to ensure that their clients got their day in court," Giasi said.
Giasi also stressed that Saldamando complied with all court orders, and instructed his clients not to answer certain questions during depositions only because he felt they were harassing.
"On the day of trial, Avatar's counsel had violated most if not all of the deadlines in the order setting trial and showed up without a witness," Giasi said. "My clients were present, with their clients, ready to go to trial and had complied with every single court order in the case."
Avatar Property's lawyers Carol M. Rooney and Adam M. Topel of Butler Weihmuller Katz Craig in Tampa did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Fourth DCA Chief Judge Spencer Levine wrote the opinion, with Judges Dorian Damoorgian and Jeffrey Kuntz concurring.
Read the ruling:
More 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 All'Disease-Causing Bacteria': Colgate and Tom’s of Maine Face Toothpaste Class Action
3 minute readFlorida-Based Law Firms Start to Lag, As New York Takes a Bigger Piece of Deals
3 minute readFowler White Burnett Opens Jacksonville Office Focused on Transportation Practice
3 minute readDisbarred Attorney Alleges ADA Violations in Lawsuit Against Miami-Dade Judges
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
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