Unpled liability, tort for undetected illness, trade secrets, and corn flan with grilled brussel sprouts and pistachios

Civil procedure -- Discovery -- Order requiring non-parties to disclose confidential and personal financial information and potentially privileged attorney-client communications departed from essential requirements of law and would cause material injury that cannot be remedied on appeal

MARK ROUSSO and THE ALHADEFF LAW GROUP, P.L., Petitioners, v. WILLIAM SCOTT HANNON, individually, and G & S REALTY ADVISORS CORP., a Florida corporation, Respondents. 3rd District.

Civil procedure -- Discovery -- Trade secrets -- Trial court departed from essential requirements of law in requiring non-party to produce documents containing trade secrets without findings to support conclusion that requesting party demonstrated a reasonable necessity for the documents that outweighed interest in maintaining confidentiality of trade secrets

LASER SPINE INSTITUTE, LLC, Petitioner, v. ROBERT WILLIAM GREER, JR., LESLIE DOUCETTE, CLARA DOUCETTE, and LESLIE DOUCETTE, JR., Respondents. 1st District.

Condominiums -- Dispute between association and unit owner regarding, among other issues, removal of certain improvements to allow access to rooftop for repairs -- Error to enter order requiring owner to “permanently” remove all improvements from parapet walls where permanent removal was not sought in association's pleadings

BARRY YAMPOL, Appellant, v. TURNBERRY ISLE SOUTH CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., etc., Appellee. 3rd District.

Torts -- Negligence -- Plaintiffs sued laboratory alleging its cytotechnologists negligently failed to identify abnormalities in plaintiff's pap smears and that this negligence caused a delay in plaintiff's cancer diagnosis -- Evidence -- Standard of care -- Expert witness testimony -- District court abused discretion in excluding testimony of plaintiff's expert witness concerning alleged breach of standard of care for cytotechnologists based on conclusion that her methodology was unreliable where witness was qualified to testify about cytotechnologists' standard of care, her methodology was reliable, and her testimony would assist the trier of fact -- District court manifestly erred in concluding that expert's methodology is an ipse dixit assessment that is devoid of any methodology that would allow another expert to challenge it in any objective sense and is not a peer-reviewable evaluation where expert formed her opinion by using reliable tools, applying an established body of medical knowledge, and drawing on her extensive, relevant experience in the fields of cytopathology and cytotechnology -- District court committed an error of law by concluding that expert's methodology did not satisfy the generally accepted standards in areas of pathology and cytotechnology, faulting expert for failing to conduct a blinded review, which is the standard set by the profession based on litigation guidelines created by interested industry groups -- District court's ruling runs afoul of Supreme Court decisions in Daubert and Kumho, which do not allow courts to delegate to interested industry groups the court's gatekeeping duties to screen out speculative, unreliable expert testimony -- District court supplanted jury's factfinding role when it determined that expert's methodology was unreliable because review bias is inherent in a non-blinded review, and expert admitted in her deposition that she had a philosophical bent toward a plaintiff who has developed cervical cancer -- District court's reasoning that expert's testimony was unreliable because her approach did not account for similar conditions and surrounding circumstances under which a cytotechnologist works was manifestly erroneous

CHRISTINA NICOLE ADAMS, CHRISTOPHER L. ADAMS, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. LABORATORY CORPORATION OF AMERICA, Defendant-Appellee. 11th Circuit.

Unclaimed property -- Life insurance funds -- Statutory requirement that insurers remit to Department of Financial Services any life insurance funds that remain unclaimed for certain period of time after the funds become “due and payable” -- Department's declaratory statement interpreting statute to mean that life insurance funds become “due and payable” at time of insured's death is clearly erroneous -- Life insurance funds become due and payable at time insurer receives proof of death and surrender of policy, when insurer knows that insured has died, or when insured attained or would have attained limiting age -- There is no requirement that insurers search death records in order to ascertain whether an insured had died

THRIVENT FINANCIAL FOR LUTHERANS, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, Appellee. 1st District.

The Law Lady.  For more info about us, click here.  To be added to our email circulation with MUCH, MUCH more law, click here and specify whether you wish to be added to our CRIMINAL, CIVIL, HEALTH & INSURANCE, 11th CIRCUIT, or all FEDERAL Recent Decisions of Interest.