In this insurance coverage dispute, the circuit court affirmed a county court judgment against the insurer on the basis that its opposing summary judgment expert affidavit contained “technical defects” (which are not identified in the opinion). The Fourth District reversed because summary judgment may not be granted by reason of a technical defect in an affidavit unless the appellate court first provides leave to amend the affidavit, if requested by the non-movant.
In this class action case, plaintiffs sued the clerk of court for charging “a reopen fee for cases previously reported as disposed of.” The trial court dismissed the complaint with prejudice for failure to state a cause of action after two amendments because of “pleading deficiencies.” The trial court reasoned that a “re-opening fee” could be charged in such cases if one followed the “Summary Reporting System Manual.” The Second District affirmed, with a special concurrence requesting clarity from the legislature and judiciary on this issue.
In this attorneys’ fees case, Ramle Int’l prevailed at trial and was awarded attorneys’ fees as part of the judgment. The trial court reserved jurisdiction as to the amount of fees and Ramle waited eleven months to file its motion to determine the amount of attorneys’ fees owed.