Sky Development, Inc. v. Vista View Development, Inc., 35 Fla. L. Wkly D1478 (Fla. 3d DCA July 7, 2010)

In this case of modern day witness tampering, the CFO of Sky Development, Inc. first passed a witness a note during the deposition, for which he was admonished, then, at trial, during a sidebar, sent the same witness two text messages advising him on his testimony.  After discovering the text messages, the trial court immediately declared a mistrial.  Vista View then moved for dismissal, which the court granted, with prejudice.

The 3d DCA upheld the dismissal, finding that the CFO’s conduct was a “blatant showing of fraud, pretense, collusion, or other similar wrongdoing.”  See Laurore v. Miami Auto Retail, Inc., 16 So.2d 862, 864 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009).

Sky Development, Inc. v. Vista View Development, Inc., 35 Fla. L. Wkly D1478 (Fla. 3d DCA July 7, 2010)

IN RE: AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE AND THE FLORIDA RULES FOR CERTIFIED AND COURT-APPOINTED MEDIATORS

The Florida Supreme Court has issued an opinion updating the rules governing mediation procedures in the state’s appellate courts.

Accordingly, the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure have been updated to include the following new rules:

TARPON SPRINGS HOSPITAL FOUNDATION, INC., v. SHIRLEY RETH, 35 Fla. L. Weekly D1532a (Fla. 2d DCA July 9, 2010)

In this medical negligence action ending in a defense verdict, the trial court awarded a new trial because a juror failed to disclose “material litigation history” during voir dire.  The appellate court found that the “the trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial” as a result of the omission by the juror.

TARPON SPRINGS HOSPITAL FOUNDATION, INC., v. SHIRLEY RETH, 35 Fla. L. Weekly D1532a (Fla. 2d DCA July 9, 2010)

IN RE: AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

On June 24, 2010, the Florida Supreme Court issued an opinion updating Rules 9.300, 9.400, and 9.410, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, in recognition that the procedure for filing a 57.105 Motion before the appellate courts was ambiguous.  The Court noted, however, that the new procedure is to be followed for any motion for sanctions.

The new Rule 9.410 provides that a motion for sanctions must be served on the opposing party before the deadline for submitting a responsive paper or brief.  If no responsive paper or brief is to be served to the challenged paper, then the deadline is 15 days from the date the challenged paper is served.  As per 57.105, the motion for sanctions should be filed with the court 21 days after being served on the opposing party.

The rules have been updated to reflect the amendments.

IN RE: AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE, Case No. SC09-2602 (Fla. June 24, 2010)