Attorneys: Jaime J. Baca, Marlene Brito

This case involved an alleged slip and fall on liquid soap that had leaked onto the floor. There was conflicting evidence and testimony about where the soap spill originated, what caused it, and how long the alleged dangerous condition existed prior to the accident. The defense contended that the spill was caused by the plaintiff, as the soap leaked out of a bottle that was in her shopping cart. Plaintiff underwent multiple pain management treatments, epidurals, facet blocs, RFAs and ultimately a low back laminectomy. Pre- and post-accident MRIs were in dispute as to whether they showed a larger herniation. Plaintiff was a Medicare recipient with a significant medical history prior to the subject incident but switched to treating under Letters of Protection after the subject incident. The trial team had their work cut out for them, sorting through over 1,500 pages of medical records and over 60 MRIs and CT scans. Ultimately, they were able to show that the complaints the plaintiff made to her regular doctors were not as severe as those she made to the LOP doctors, and defense experts argued that a review of the MRI scans from before and after the incident showed no change in condition. In addition to refuting Plaintiff’s allegations regarding her injuries, the defense argued that the condition of the floor was open and obvious. Evidence showed that the store had conducted its regular walk-through inspection just 10 minutes prior to the incident and found no dangerous condition. After a four-day trial, Plaintiff asked the jury for $1.5 million. The jury, led by a 30-year-old foreperson, deliberated for 45 minutes and came back with a complete defense verdict.

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. Reed, 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: 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: 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: 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: 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.