Attorneys: Joseph P. Menello

Plaintiff in this case alleged that she sustained a broken elbow requiring two surgeries as a result of being tripped by a store employee at the coffee station inside the store. The evidence showed that the incident was a result of the employee stepping backwards while straightening a floor mat, and that the employee did not see the Plaintiff before the collision occurred. The store contended that the employee had not acted unreasonably and that there was no negligence as the incident was clearly an accident. The jury agreed, and returned a verdict of no liability against our client in 37 minutes.

Attorneys: Michael E., David Bolen

Plaintiff alleged that he suffered a ruptured esophagus as a result of eating defective seafood served to him at the defendant restaurant. Plaintiff asked the jury for $6.5 million, but they returned a defense verdict.

Attorneys: James R. Brown, Jason R. Hull

Plaintiff alleged a slip and fall in her own apartment related to water leaking from the air conditioner. Plaintiff retained a well-known local expert as her life care planner who intended to offer medical causation opinions that were outside his medical specialty, but the defense was successful in prohibiting that testimony. Plaintiff’s last demand was $950,000, but the jury returned a complete defense verdict. 

Attorneys: Kurt M. Spengler

Plaintiff alleged she slipped and fell on a transitory foreign substance that occurred with regularity on theme park’s premises. Plaintiff argued that the theme park should have known of the substance and was negligent for failing to warn of the substance and failing to maintain the premises. After an 8-day trial, the jury returned a defense verdict.

Attorneys: John Floyd Jr.

John Floyd, Jr. obtained a defense verdict following a bench trial in Davidson County, Tennessee. Plaintiff alleged that our client, a security guard and security company, was guilty of assault and battery. Plaintiff presented evidence of the alleged incident and asked the court to award her damages. Following a bench trial, the court rejected the Plaintiff’s claims and entered a complete defense verdict.

Attorneys: Jason A. Glusman, Jaime J. Baca, Jonathon S. Miller, James R. Foster

Fort Lauderdale partners Jason Glusman, Jonathon Miller, and James Foster, and Miami partner Jaime Baca obtained a defense verdict in a catastrophic injury case on behalf of a large Florida-based grocery store in Osceola County, Florida, earlier this month.

Plaintiff in this case was employed by an independent contractor that the grocery store used for maintenance jobs at their dairy processing plant. While performing his job duties under the instruction and supervision of his employer, Plaintiff was involved in a workplace accident that resulted in him incurring significant burns on his stomach and genitals. He was airlifted from the scene and spent several days in the hospital undergoing burn treatment protocols. In addition to the medical bills, the lawsuit included a claim for PTSD and a loss of consortium claim from Plaintiff’s wife, to whom he had been married just six months prior to the subject incident.

At the end of a six-day trial, Plaintiff asked for $17 million in closing arguments. The jury found no liability on the part of our client, and returned a complete defense verdict. Due to the rejection of a Proposal for Settlement, our client will be entitled to seeks fees and costs; they also intend to pursue a separate action for indemnity from Plaintiff’s employer.

Congratulations to everyone who worked on this difficult case.

Attorneys: Michael C. Tyson, Oscar Draughn

Orlando Partner, Mike Tyson, and Orlando Associate, Oscar Draughn, obtained a defense verdict in a negligent security case in Brevard County, Florida, last week.

We represented a property owner in this case that involved a physical altercation that started at a bar and lounge located within our client’s strip plaza and spilled into the parking lot. The two Co-Plaintiffs alleged that they were beaten and stabbed in the altercation, and that our client failed to provide adequate security for their premises that could have prevented the dangerous criminal attack from occurring.

Each Plaintiff was stabbed in excess of five times, and both underwent multiple surgeries and claimed to have sustained traumatic brain injuries as a result of the attack.

Trial lasted nine days and included a site visit so the jury could inspect the premises for themselves. At closing, Plaintiffs asked for a combined total of $32 million, but the jury found no liability on the part of our client and returned a defense verdict.

This case originated in 2020, and the client is grateful to finally have it resolved. Congratulations, Mike and Oscar, on this excellent outcome.

Attorneys: Richard E. Ramsey, Kyle Leigh Schmitt

Jacksonville Partners, Rick Ramsey and Kyle Leigh Schmitt, Esq., recently obtained a complete defense verdict in Volusia County, Florida.

The case arose from an alleged concussion suffered by a college soccer player in 2013. Plaintiff sued a Central Florida university, its head female soccer coach, and a certified athletic trainer, alleging our clients were negligent in managing the player’s concussion, leading to a TBI with depression, sleep and auditory problems, and PTSD. Plaintiff underwent a multitude of treatments, including speech therapy, occupational therapy, vison therapy and hormone therapy. Their expert submitted a Life Care Plan of approximately $400k.

Through diligent discovery, the trial team discovered that Plaintiff had a history of concussions prior to the subject incident. Team records showed that on the day of the subject incident, Plaintiff disobeyed her coaches and participated in full-contact practice when she had been advised not to do so. Medical records in the months following her injury showed that she did not properly disclose her ongoing symptoms to the team doctors and regularly downplayed the severity of how she was feeling.

At trial, Mr. Ramsey and Ms. Schmitt successfully impeached several of Plaintiff’s fact witnesses, showing that they were lying in an attempt to bolster Plaintiff’s claims. In some cases, their testimony contradicted that of the Plaintiff herself.

Plaintiff’s counsel asked the jury for $7.5 million in closing. The jury was out for 58 minutes before returning a complete defense verdict.

Congratulations Rick and Kyle on this outstanding outcome.

Attorneys: Jaime J. Baca, Natalia Pinzon Martinez, Francisco J. Varona

Miami Partner, Jaime Baca, and Associates, Natalia Pinzon Martinez and Francisco Varona, recently obtained a defense verdict on behalf of Publix Super Markets in a premises liability case in Miami-Dade County.

This case arose from a slip and fall that Plaintiff claimed was caused by a large water spill near the front cash registers. Plaintiff claimed her fall aggravated an existing injury, for which she had already undergone a lumbar surgery at L4-5, and presented over $420,000 in medical bills at trial. Medical records showed that Plaintiff had not treated for more than a year before our subject incident, and MRI studies showed no change in her condition from before and after the fall.

This was a difficult and contentious trial with multiple rulings that made it difficult for us to present our defense. Despite this, the jury took just 30 minutes of deliberation to reject Plaintiff’s suggested award of nearly $3 million and return a complete defense verdict in Publix’s favor.

Congratulations Jaime, Natalia, Frankie, and the entire team that worked on this case. The client is thrilled with the result.

Attorneys: Jason A. Glusman, James R. Foster

Fort Lauderdale Partners Jason Glusman and James Foster recently obtained a defense verdict on behalf of Publix Super Markets in a premises liability matter in Broward County, Florida.

This case involved a minor Plaintiff who claimed permanent injuries to her left ankle, right wrist, right ankle, left knee, and back, after a slip and fall in the store. While it was confirmed there was water on the floor, there was no evidence that Publix had actual or constructive notice of the water before the fall, and neither the child nor her mother could testify as to the possible origin. There was also inconsistent testimony about the details of the accident and the level of the minor child’s ongoing pain.

Throughout the course of discovery our team discovered a previous car accident in which Plaintiffs had sought similar damages on behalf of the minor child that Plaintiffs attempted to conceal throughout the course of this litigation.

Counsel for the Plaintiffs asked for over $500,000 in damages at trial. The jury found no negligence on the part of Publix, and returned a complete defense verdict.

Congratulations to Jason and James who tried this case, and to Todd Barron, Payton Fletcher, and the rest of the team who helped to work it up. The client is very pleased with this excellent outcome.

Attorneys: T. Michael Kennedy

Miami Partner Michael Kennedy recently obtained a defense verdict in a general liability case on behalf of a golf resort in Miami-Dade County, Florida.

This case arose from an incident in which the Plaintiff was struck in the side of the head by an errant golf ball while eating lunch on a resort restaurant patio that overlooked the greens of two different golf holes. The Plaintiff filed suit against our client, alleging negligent design and maintenance of the golf course, that the occurrence was reasonably foreseeable, and that the resort failed to warn of an unreasonably dangerous condition. She claimed extensive injuries as a result of the incident, including a traumatic brain injury resulting in bipolar disorder with psychotic episodes and PTSD, and a loss of consortium claim from her husband. Plaintiff’s counsel presented a life care plan in the amount of $9 million, and argued another $11 million in non-economic damages.

Michael tried this case along with co-defense counsel retained by the golf resort’s excess carrier. They argued that the golf course was designed and maintained properly, that there were no previous incidents of guests being struck and injured by a golf ball, and that there was no duty to warn. They further presented medical record evidence and expert testimony that the Plaintiff’s many post incident complaints of bipolar disorder with psychotic episodes, PTSD, cognitive decline, memory issues and other associated complaints were not the result of a TBI and predated the incident.

Multiple efforts to settle this case both before and during the trial were rejected by Plaintiff and her counsel. After eight days of testimony, the jury found no liability on the part of our client and returned a complete defense verdict.

Congratulations Michael on this excellent result.

Attorneys: Michael C. Tyson, Oscar Draughn

Orlando Partner Mike Tyson and Associate Oscar Draughn obtained a defense verdict on behalf of a national retail department store in Volusia County, Florida, last week.

This case arose from an alleged slip and fall in the fragrance department of the store, where Plaintiff worked as an independent perfume vendor. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that the slip and fall was caused by an accumulation of perfume on the floor because of the way perfume is marketed and sold in the fragrance department. Specifically, it was alleged perfume accumulated on the floor of the fragrance department as a result of it being sprayed into the air and on perfume strips for customers. Eyewitnesses testified that the floor was not slippery that day, all regular cleaning processes had been followed, and that Plaintiff was not looking where she was going at the time of the incident, causing her to trip over her own feet. Additionally, there was no evidence presented that established that our client had actual or constructive notice of the alleged dangerous condition.

As a result of the fall, Plaintiff sustained a fractured wrist and a fractured hip which required surgery to repair, along with a recommendation for a future hip replacement and significant ongoing need for medical treatment to manage her injuries. Plaintiff’s medical records pre-dating the incident showed a history of osteoporosis and an inconsistent use of the medications prescribed to treat the condition.

Reasonable efforts to settle the case prior to trial were not successful, and Plaintiff’s counsel asked the jury for $2.5 million at closing. The jury found no negligence on the part of our client and returned a complete defense verdict.

Congratulations Mike, Oscar, and the entire team that worked on this file. The client is very happy with this result.

Attorneys: Mark H. Ruff Jr., Jaime J. Baca, Joshua T. Jurnovoy

West Palm Beach Partners Mark H. Ruff, Jr., and Joshua Jurnovoy, and Miami Partner Jaime Baca, recently obtained a defense verdict on behalf of Publix Super Markets in Seminole County, Florida.

This case involved a low-speed collision in the loading dock area behind a Publix store. The Plaintiff filed suit against Publix, alleging that the accident was caused by its truck driver, and that the Plaintiff suffered spinal injuries leading to a two-level cervical fusion and $200,000 in medical expenses as a result.

We contended that the Plaintiff was at fault for the accident, and that given that the collision occurred at a slow speed and caused very minor property damage to the vehicles, the accident was not the cause of the Plaintiff’s injuries.

Trial lasted five days, with Plaintiff’s counsel asking the jury for $2.7 million at closing. The jury found that Publix and its truck driver were not at fault, and returned a complete defense verdict.

Attorneys: Christopher A. Cazin

Tampa Partner Chris Cazin recently obtained an Order of Dismissal for Fraud on the Court on behalf of Publix Super Markets in a premises liability case in Pasco County, Florida.

The Plaintiff slipped and fell at a Publix store and claimed a right shoulder injury, requiring two surgeries, among other injuries. We successfully argued that the Plaintiff undertook efforts to conceal his extensive pre-incident history of significant right shoulder pain, diagnoses, and treatment, which went to the heart of his claim and warranted dismissal of the case. The Court agreed and dismissed the case with prejudice.

Congratulations Chris on this excellent work.

Attorneys: Michael R. D’Lugo

Wicker Smith recently prevailed in an appellate matter heard by the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Our Melbourne office represented a national retail warehouse chain in a premises liability matter in which Plaintiff slipped and fell on a crushed grape that was located in front of the register line, fracturing her patella in the fall. The case was litigated in federal court and summary judgment obtained after arguing that our client had no actual or constructive knowledge of the grape creating a potentially dangerous condition on the floor. The Court entered an order granting Final Summary Judgment in July 2024, after which Plaintiff appealed to the 11th Circuit.

Michael D’Lugo of the Orlando office handled the appeal, filing a detailed answer brief that refuted Plaintiff’s arguments, and the 11th Circuit entered a Per Curiam Affirmance upholding the District Court’s Summary Judgment ruling on March 5, 2026.

This was a difficult and contentious case, and our client is glad to finally have it resolved. Congratulations to all on this excellent work.

Attorneys: Richard E. Ramsey, Jessica L. Gross

Jacksonville Partner, Rick Ramsey, and Miami Partner, Jessica Gross, recently prevailed in an appellate matter considered by Florida’s Fifth District Court of Appeal.

Rick Ramsey handled the underlying case, a premises liability matter for a national fast food chain involving allegations of failure to properly warn of a dangerous condition and failure to properly maintain the premises. The Plaintiff slipped on an area of the floor that had been recently mopped by a store employee. A bright yellow wet floor sign was prominently displayed in the area. The Plaintiff initially denied seeing the wet floor sign but later tried to correct her testimony when the store video proved otherwise. The Plaintiff argued she was trapped and had no other choice but to traverse the wet floor because it was the path to the exit. The Court entered final summary judgment in favor of our client in July 2022.

Jessica Gross handled the appeal. The Fifth DCA affirmed with a PCA and provisionally granted our motion for attorney’s fees.

Proposals for settlement were served nearly five years before the entry of summary judgment, triggering our right to seek recovery of attorney’s fees.

Congratulations Rick and Jessica on this excellent outcome.

Attorneys: Patrick L. Mixson, Bianca Perito

Orlando partner, Patrick Mixson, and associate, Bianca Perito, recently obtained summary judgment on behalf of Publix Super Markets in a case filed in Brevard County, Florida.

Plaintiff in this case claimed that she slipped and fell on spilled water and alleged that she required two years’ worth of past medical expenses, along with necessary future medical care involving multiple surgeries per the opinion of a life care planner. Store camera video from the date of the incident showed that several employees walked past the area where the plaintiff fell prior to the incident. However, the Court concluded that there was no evidence that the substance was on the floor for a sufficient amount of time to place Publix on notice of its presence.

Congratulations, Patrick and Bianca, on this great work.

Attorneys: Andrew Vogt, Sean L. Farrell

Naples Partner Drew Vogt and Associate Sean Farrell recently obtained summary judgment on behalf of Publix Super Markets in a premises liability case in Collier County, Florida.

Plaintiff in this case alleged that he slipped and fell on a transitory substance in the meat department of a Publix store, sustaining injuries to his head, left shoulder, and left elbow.

Plaintiff was not able to provide any credible testimony or evidence that there was any substance on the floor, and multiple Publix employees testified that the area was clean and dry, without any track marks, dirt, stickiness, water drops, or any other indication of any liquid having been on the ground. The department manager had performed a routine check of the area less than two minutes before the fall and found no dangerous condition, and the area required no cleanup when store associates arrived to assist the Plaintiff after his fall.

We moved for summary judgment on the grounds that no existence of a potentially dangerous condition had been established, and additionally, that had such a condition existed at all, Publix had not been made aware of such a condition. The Court agreed, and entered summary judgment in Publix’s favor.

Congratulations Drew and Sean on this great work.

Attorneys: Jason R. Hull, Robert F. White

Tampa Partner, Jason Hull and Associate, Robert White, secured summary judgment for a retail pharmacy chain in a premises liability case in Hillsborough County, Florida last week.

The case stemmed from an alleged incident in 2019. The plaintiff filed suit just before the statute of limitations expired. She claimed that a swinging half-door in the pharmacy area hit her in the back, causing disc herniation, disc disruption, and hip sprains.

Our summary judgment motion argued that the door was used in its normal course of operation and that its location was so open and obvious that it did not constitute a dangerous condition as a matter of law. The Court agreed and entered final summary judgment.

Congratulations to Jason and Bob! The client is very pleased with this outcome.

Attorneys: Dalton S. Tritschler

Sarasota Associate Dalton Tritschler recently obtained summary judgment on behalf of an apartment complex in a premises liability case in Manatee County, Florida.

Plaintiff alleged that he tripped on a step-down in the outdoor common area of his apartment complex. He filed suit against our clients, claiming they failed to maintain the premises and that the step down was a dangerous condition that caused his fall and injuries. Plaintiff alleged that he suffered a traumatic brain injury and a neck injury from the fall.

At Plaintiff’s deposition, he was not able to testify conclusively as to where he fell or what caused the fall, nor did he provide any evidence that the step-down or the surrounding areas was in any state of disrepair. We moved for summary judgment on the grounds that a difference in floor levels is not an inherently dangerous condition, and Plaintiff had failed to establish that our clients breached their duty of care in any way. The Court agreed, and entered summary judgment in our client’s favor.

Congratulations Dalton on this great work.

Attorneys: Marlene Brito

Miami Partner, Marlene Brito, Esq., recently obtained summary judgment on behalf of a national retail warehouse club in Miami-Dade County.

This was a negligent security case in which Plaintiff was assaulted in the store parking lot by a third party. Plaintiff alleged our client, the warehouse club, failed to have proper security measures in place, and as a result, he claimed a concussion, jaw dislocation, memory issues, blurry vision and neck and back pain. Plaintiff argued that the incident was foreseeable, and cited to numerous prior criminal incidents that had occurred at the property to support his claim.

The subject incident took place in the parking lot before plaintiff entered the store, and lasted less than two minutes in its entirety. The Court agreed with our argument that the incident was sudden and unforeseeable, and granted summary judgment in our client’s favor.

This ruling triggered our Proposal for Settlement, and our client will now be entitled to seek fees and costs dating from December 2024.

Congratulations Marlene on this excellent work.

Attorneys: Joshua M. Maus

Orlando Associate, Joshua M. Maus, recently obtained summary judgment in a premises liability case on behalf of an apartment complex in Orange County, Florida.

This 2021 case was original handled by another firm before being transferred to us at the client’s request. The Plaintiff alleged that she slipped and fell on the stairs of her apartment complex. She claimed injuries to her left knee, right wrist, right ankle, lower back, and neck, as well as swelling in her legs. Plaintiff could not provide any evidence as to what had actually caused her to fall – at times she alleged it was cracked concrete, at other times she alleged it was an unidentified transitory substance – nor was there any evidence that the apartment complex had any actual or constructive notice of any potentially dangerous condition. We moved for summary judgment on these grounds and the Court agreed, entering Final Summary Judgment in Favor of Defendants on January 29.

Congratulations to Josh, who wrote and argued this motion. The client is very pleased with this result.

Attorneys: Patrick L. Mixson

Attorneys: Patrick L. Mixson, Isaac H. Horowitz

Orlando Partner, Patrick Mixson, and Associate, Isaac Horowitz, recently obtained summary judgment on behalf of a popular theme park in the Orlando tourism corridor.

Plaintiff alleged that she fell due to a sticky substance on the ground in the queue of an attraction at the theme park, and that she suffered a fractured hip as the result. Plaintiff was unable to identify what the substance was or where it could have come from, and she testified in her deposition that she had walked through the exact same area just moments before without incident. Accordingly, we moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the theme park could not have had constructive or actual notice of the allegedly dangerous condition prior to the Plaintiff’s fall.

The Court agreed, and granted final summary judgment in our client’s favor. Congratulations, Patrick and Isaac, on this great outcome.

Attorneys: Nicholas S. Seamster, Ryan P. Denish

West Palm Beach Partner, Nicholas S. Seamster, and Associate, Ryan Denish, recently obtained summary judgment on behalf of a large Florida-based grocery store in a slip and fall case in Palm Beach County, Florida.

Plaintiff in this case slipped on an unknown substance in the soap and detergent aisle. She claimed injuries to her left foot, right knee, and right hand.

Store employees doing routine area checks testified that they didn’t notice anything on the floor during multiple passes through the subject area minutes before the fall, and video surveillance showed several customers moving through the aisle where Plaintiff’s fall occurred without incident. Based on this evidence, we moved for summary judgment arguing that the substance in question could not have been on the floor for more than about 55 seconds, and as such, the grocery store would not have had actual or constructive knowledge of the potentially dangerous condition. The court agreed, and summary judgment was granted.

Congratulations to Ryan, who wrote and argued this motion, and to Nicholas, who supervised the handling of this file.

Attorneys: Valerie White

Pensacola Associate, Valerie White, recently obtained summary judgment in a premises liability matter on behalf of a major fast food restaurant chain in Gulf County, Florida.

This case arose from a slip and fall inside the restaurant on a rainy day. Plaintiff claimed injuries to her back, hip, shoulder, ankle, knee, and wrist, as well as a traumatic brain injury. She sought extensive treatment, with medical bills totaling more than $145,000.

During her deposition, Plaintiff could not provide any evidence of what the substance on the floor may have been, how long it had been there, or where it might have come from.

Based on her claimed injuries, she demanded more than $2,500,000 for settlement, and negotiations failed due to her refusal to accept any less. The case was then set for trial.

In December 2023, our Motion for Summary Judgment was heard, in which we moved for summary judgment based on the restaurant’s lack of actual or constructive notice of a transitory foreign substance on the floor. The Court agreed, summary judgment was granted, and the case dismissed in early February.

Congratulations, Valerie, on this excellent work for our client.

Attorneys: Chad E. Leeper, Bianca Taraschi

Melbourne Partner, Chad Leeper, and Associate, Bianca Taraschi, obtained final summary judgment in a premises liability case on behalf of a national membership retail warehouse club in Seminole County, Florida, last week.

Plaintiff claimed she slipped and fell on a piece of food in the warehouse near a sampling cart. She claimed injury to her neck, shoulder, and hip as a result of the fall, for which she underwent physical therapy, injections, and surgery.

Record evidence showed that Plaintiff’s fall occurred less than a minute after the condition was created, which did not afford the store a reasonable amount of time to resolve the condition. Plaintiff’s primary argument at the hearing was that the Defendant failed to warn Plaintiff of the fall in that an employee of the warehouse saw the food substance fall to the floor and was on his way to pick it up when the fall occurred.  Plaintiff argued the employee should have yelled out to customers in the area to warn them of the substance.  The Court agreed with our argument that Florida law does not require a store owner to yell out to customers who are in the vicinity of a transitory substance and that the situation did not create a triable issue for a jury considering the undisputed facts. As such, the Court entered summary judgment in our client’s favor.

Congratulations Chad and Bianca on this great result!

Attorneys: Patrick L. Mixson

Orlando Partner, Patrick Mixson, recently obtained a summary judgment in a premises liability case on behalf of Publix Super Markets in a case filed in Volusia County, Florida.

The Plaintiff claimed that he slipped and fell on a piece of banana on the floor at the Publix store in question and sustained injuries to his neck, back, and left shoulder. He underwent injections and physical therapy he related to the incident and received recommendations for future medical care. However, the Court agreed with our argument that there was no evidence that Publix negligently maintained the floor or that Publix was on notice of the banana before the incident and entered summary judgment in Publix’s favor.

Congratulations Patrick on this great outcome.

Attorneys: Nicholas S. Seamster, Anthony M. Crum

West Palm Beach partner Nicholas Seamster and associate Anthony Crum recently had a summary judgment ruling affirmed by the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal.

The underlying case involved a slip and fall at a Publix Super Markets location in Palm Beach County in 2019. Plaintiff alleged that she slipped in a large puddle of water, and further alleged that the puddle had been left by another customer’s child 17 minutes prior to her fall. Video footage of the incident showed no evidence of any definitive source of spilled water, and also showed a store employee in the vicinity of the area as well as numerous customers walking through the area of the alleged puddle without incident prior to Plaintiff’s fall. Further, the Plaintiff could not rule out that the source of the water was due to a customer with a tipped over water bottle in their cart approximately one minute prior to the Plaintiff’s fall.

Plaintiff claimed multiple injuries to her knee, neck, back, and groin as a result of the incident. She underwent multiple rounds of injections, two extensive lumbar surgeries, and a hernia surgery following her fall, with claimed medical bills in excess of $1.2 million.

We moved for summary judgment based on Publix’s lack of actual or constructive notice of the alleged dangerous condition. The trial court agreed, and summary judgment was granted in May 2023. Plaintiff timely appealed, and the matter came before the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal for oral argument in early October 2024. After hearing arguments of counsel, the Court issued a per curiam affirmance on October 11.

Congratulations Nick and Anthony on this excellent outcome.

Attorneys: Heidi B. Panepinto

Congratulations to Naples partner Heidi Panepinto, who obtained back to back summary judgments during the same week in late September.

Case 1: Lee County, FL; General Negligence

We represented a mental health care facility in this hotly contested general negligence action arising out of allegations of neglect of a vulnerable adult in violation of Florida’s Adult Protective Services Act.

The individual was Baker Acted by law enforcement and transported to our client facility with only the clothes on her back and her driver’s license. Upon being admitted, she was evaluated by a psychiatrist who determined she was a competent adult, capable of functioning independently in the community. She was started on medications and quickly stabilized. She declined to sign any Releases of Information; therefore the facility was legally prohibited from disclosing her PHI to third parties. Upon her discharge, she tried to call family to pick her up, but they didn’t answer. She refused to let our client try to contact them and requested a bus pass instead. She was given a bus pass, route, and map. When she did not return home timely, her mother contacted our client for an update and was advised that her daughter had been discharged two days earlier. After a two-day investigation, the patient’s recently deceased body was discovered behind a bush close to the bus stop near her parents’ house. The autopsy concluded she died from natural causes secondary to dehydration.

Decedent’s family sued our client facility for neglect of a vulnerable adult in violation of Section 415.1111, F.S. We filed a motion for summary judgment on two issues:  1) Our client owed no duty to Decedent after she was lawfully and legally discharged from the facility, and 2) Our client had no legal authority to disclose Decedent’s PHI to third parties without her verbal and/or written consent to do so. The hearing on our Motion for Summary Judgment went forward in early August. The Judge reserved ruling, and granted summary judgment in our favor of our client on September 18.

Case 2: Collier County, FL; Premises Liability

This was a premises liability matter arising from an alleged slip and fall that occurred in the parking lot of a popular Naples resort. Plaintiff alleged that she slipped and fell on a dead palm frond after stepping out of her vehicle, and that the fall caused her to have a seizure, as well as neck and back injuries. Plaintiff claimed Defendant was negligent for failing to warn her about the dangerous condition and for failing to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition. During her deposition, Plaintiff testified that she didn’t see the palm frond despite it being broad daylight and sunny. She also testified that she didn’t know how long the palm frond had been on the ground, and had no evidence that the hotel knew or should have known it was there.

Hotel staff testified that they had no knowledge that the palm frond was there prior to the incident, they had no idea how long it was there, and that the parking lot was inspected frequently by several employees throughout the day, who were all trained to pick up and remove debris such as this. Summary judgment was sought on the grounds that Defendant had availed itself of both the duty to warn and duty to reasonably maintain, because the condition was open and obvious and not inherently dangerous, and Plaintiff’s own inattentiveness is what caused her to slip and fall. The Court agreed, and summary judgment was granted in our client’s favor.

Congratulations Heidi on this excellent work on behalf of our clients.

Attorneys: Richard E. Ramsey

Jacksonville partner Rick Ramsey recently obtained summary judgment in a wrongful death case on behalf of a national hotel chain.

This case arose from an incident wherein four adults, ranging in age from their 40’s to their 60’s, checked into a Jacksonville hotel. They allegedly found what they thought was cocaine on the floor of the hotel bar, and returned to their room to intentionally ingest it. It turned out that the substance was not cocaine, but fentanyl. One of the four began to feel ill, and left the room to get some fresh air. He was discovered unresponsive near the pool by the hotel staff, who called the paramedics. He received a dose of Narcan, and was transported to the hospital to recover. His wife and the other couple were later discovered dead in their hotel room, having ingested fatal doses of fentanyl.

The estates of all three of the deceased sued the hotel, arguing that had the hotel timely performed a wellness check at the room of the intoxicated guest, they would have found the other three individuals suffering the effects of overdose and could have administered Narcan to them as well, thus preventing their deaths.

Our summary judgment argument was made in two parts. First, that Fla. Statute 768.075(4) provides immunity from suit to property owners when the injury or death was occasioned in the commission of a felony, and voluntarily being in possession of cocaine or fentanyl is a third degree felony; and second, that Plaintiff’s argument relied on the improper stacking of inferences, the first of which was the inference that the other three adults would have been alive when the fourth was discovered by the pool. There was no evidence of that causal link.

The Court agreed and granted summary judgment, dismissing the case against our client. Due to the rejection of a Proposal for Settlement, we are now pursuing all available remedies to recover our clients’ fees and costs, including a 57.105 motion.

Congratulations, Rick. The client is very pleased with the outcome of this difficult case.

Attorneys: Joseph P. Menello, Alexander R. Taylor

Atlanta partner Joe Menello and associate Alex Taylor recently obtained summary judgment on behalf of Publix Super Markets in a premises-liability case in DeKalb County, Georgia.

This case arose when a customer alleged that she was being harassed by an off-duty police officer at a Publix location in 2021. She brought suit against the Officer and the store, claiming that she told the store about the Officer’s actions and that the store refused to do anything about it. It became clear after the Plaintiff was deposed that she never made these reports.

We moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the store had no prior knowledge of the alleged actions and accordingly couldn’t have addressed the issues any sooner than it did. The Court agreed and granted our motion, dismissing the case against Publix.

Congratulations to Joe and Alex on this excellent result.

Attorneys: Joseph P. Menello, Asher W. Lipsett

Atlanta partner Joe Menello and associate Asher Lipsett recently obtained a dismissal of a case on behalf of Publix Super Markets in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, Gainesville Division.

Plaintiff alleged a number of dubious claims against Publix. She filed her lawsuit the day before the applicable statute of limitations ran but did not serve Publix for almost three years. After removing the case to federal court, we argued that the suit was required to be dismissed, as it did not relate back due to Plaintiff’s lack of diligence and was time-barred.

Plaintiff sought leave of court to voluntarily dismiss her case in order to refile under Georgia’s “renewal statute” (O.C.G.A. § 9-2-61). We opposed this maneuver and argued that allowing Plaintiff a second bite at the apple would be a complete circumvention of the purpose of the statute of limitation, reward Plaintiff for her dilatory conduct, and significantly prejudice Publix.

The Court agreed and denied Plaintiff the opportunity to voluntarily dismiss her case, after which time the Court granted our underlying motion and dismissed Plaintiff’s case with prejudice, preventing her from using the renewal statute to revive her claims in the future.

Attorneys: Andrew Vogt, Jamie A. Ringhofer, Matthew Lynch

Congratulations to Naples partner, Drew Vogt, who recently argued Motions for Summary Judgment in two separate matters on the same day in Lee County, Florida, and won them both.

In the first case, a slip and fall case on behalf of Publix Supermarkets, evidence showed that Plaintiff walked over the incident area three times in a matter of moments before slipping and falling on his fourth pass. We argued that Plaintiff was unable to meet his burden of proof in establishing actual or constructive notice of a potentially dangerous condition. The Court agreed, and summary judgment was granted.

In the second case, on behalf of a small locally owned grocery carry-out, Plaintiff alleged that we were negligent in failing to warn of a potential hazard and failing to maintain the premises after he successfully ascended a handicapped curb ramp, but fell off the top of the sidewalk when he went to reach for a shopping cart that was allegedly heading his direction.  We argued that there was no duty to warn of the curb ramp or sidewalk, as they were open and obvious conditions, and further argued that there was no evidence the curb ramp or sidewalk were in disrepair or in violation of any applicable code provisions that would enable the Plaintiff to establish our client was negligent in failing to maintain the premises. The Court agreed, and summary judgment was granted.

Drew’s co-counsel in the first case was Of Counsel Jamie Ringhofer, and in the second case his co-counsel was Associate Matthew Lynch. Congrats to all on a job well done.

Attorneys: Patrick L. Mixson, Jacqueline N. Bourdon

Congratulations to Orlando Partner, Patrick Mixson, and Associate, Jacqueline Bourdon, on obtaining summary judgment for Publix Super Markets in a premises liability case in Volusia County, Florida.

The Plaintiff claimed that she slipped and fell in the produce department of a Publix store. She alleged that she sustained injuries to her knee, requiring arthroscopic surgery, and lower back, attributing approximately $200,000 of medical bills to the incident.

Though the Plaintiff testified in her deposition that she believed she slipped on brown, slimy lettuce, the Court found that her testimony was inconsistent with the store camera video and that there was no evidence that the Plaintiff actually slipped on a transitory foreign substance. The Court granted summary judgment in Publix’s favor. As a result, Publix will be entitled to recovery of attorney’s fees and costs, in light of a previous Proposal for Settlement.

Attorneys: Christopher A. Cazin, Sonny G. Romano

We represented a logistics and warehousing corporation in this claim brought by the Plaintiff, its employee, following a clamp lift truck collision which caused a catastrophic injury and leg amputation.

Plaintiff and his spouse filed their lawsuit in 2019. From the beginning of the case, we argued that our client was immune from tort liability under Florida Statutes section 440.11 because Plaintiffs could not demonstrate that our client committed an intentional tort under Section 440.11(b). Specifically, we argued that Plaintiffs could not show that our client engaged in conduct it knew was “virtually certain” to result in an injury or that the Plaintiff, as an employee, was unaware of the risk of danger because it was hidden.

We filed a Motion for Summary Judgment and argued that Plaintiffs could not prove the necessary elements under Section 440.11(b) to overcome our client’s immunity. The Court agreed and granted our Motion, disposing of a case nearly five-years-old.

Additionally, Plaintiffs rejected proposals for settlement allowing our client to pursue both attorneys’ fees and costs.

Attorneys: Kayli R.T. Camarena, Jason R. Hull

Tampa Associate, Kayli Camarena, recently obtained summary judgment in a trip and fall case in Pinellas County, Florida.

Plaintiff in this case tripped over a large battery that our client placed on the floor of the rotunda at a professional sports complex. The battery was placed on the ground for 15 seconds while our client picked up a piece of trash, a fact which was corroborated by video surveillance. The video further showed that another family avoided the battery on the floor moments before the Plaintiff encountered it. Plaintiff admitted in her deposition that the battery was out in the open, not concealed, and she would have seen it had she looked where she walked.

Good faith efforts to settle the case were rejected, so we moved for summary judgment based on the evidence that the battery was open and obvious. After hearing arguments of counsel and reviewing the surveillance video, the Court agreed with our position and summary judgment was granted.

Attorneys: Amy Ray

Tampa Partner, Amy Ray, recently obtained summary judgment in a premises liability matter on behalf of an apartment complex in Polk County, Florida.

This case involved a minor child that was hit by a car while playing unsupervised in the parking lot of the defendant apartment complex. The Plaintiff mother alleged that but for the recent removal of a speed bump in the area the accident occurred, the accident and her child’s subsequent injuries could have been prevented.

Record evidence showed that there were multiple speed bumps, cautionary signs, and other speed control methods implemented throughout the property, despite the fact that there is no code or standard for the placement or removal of speed bumps, and it is well established that an apartment complex does not have a duty to install or use speed control devices of any type.

We moved for summary judgment citing this lack of duty, and also that the driver of the car was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries to the minor Plaintiff, not the apartment complex. The Court agreed, and summary judgment was granted.

Congratulations, Amy, on this excellent outcome.

Attorneys: Michael C. Tyson, Kelley C. Godfrey

Orlando Partners, Mike Tyson and Kelley Godfrey, obtained a very favorable verdict on behalf of a hotel and resort client in a slip and fall case in Broward County, Florida.

Plaintiff’s injuries were a fifth metatarsal fracture in the left foot, and the main driver of the case, an alleged neck injury that culminated in a C3-C6 fusion surgery. She claimed past medical bills of $380,000 and future medicals of $160,000.

Throughout the case Mike and Kelley focused on the delayed onset of neck complaints and repeatedly highlighted the four initial visits to healthcare providers following the fall where Plaintiff directly denied neck pain and complained about the foot only. Through a canvassing of local hospital records, a prior car accident which sent Plaintiff into the E.R. in a cervical collar was also discovered. This was featured throughout the trial, as this record indicated not only neck pain after the collision, but a history of “bulging discs x2” and “spinal stenosis” as reported in the E.R. years before the subject slip and fall.

After a five day trial, Plaintiff’s counsel asked the jury for $4.6 million. In the Defendants’ closing, the jury was told to disregard the neck injury, and to compensate Plaintiff only for the foot injury—which was comprised of $689.00 in urgent care visits, and whatever pain and suffering the jury found appropriate for a few weeks in a boot. The jury came back with a total damages award of $21,700.00 which included $700.00 in past medicals and just $21,000.00 in past pain and suffering.

Efforts to resolve the case in the week leading up to the trial were rejected. Due to the rejection of a prior Proposal for Settlement, our client will be entitled to seek fees and costs dating from October 2023.

Attorneys: Andrew Vogt

Naples Partner, Drew Vogt, obtained summary judgment in a slip and fall case pending in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida – Ft. Myers Division.

Our client in this matter was a national retail pharmacy chain. Plaintiff claimed that he slipped and fell in the restroom of a store located near the Naples Pier, and was transported from the scene via EMS. Plaintiff alleged that as a result of this accident, he suffered a broken leg, a torn rotator cuff that required surgery to repair, and injuries to his lumbar back.

During his deposition, Plaintiff admitted that he did not see anyone spill anything, nor did he see any cleaning supplies, caution signs, or skid marks before or after the fall. A store employee testified that he had been in the restroom approximately five minutes prior to the subject incident, and that the restroom was clean, dry, and nothing was malfunctioning or out of the ordinary.

We moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the store did not have actual or constructive notice of a dangerous condition. The Court agreed, and summary judgment was granted.