Carlo Ponti v. Kevin Baronowsky
This text of Carlo Ponti v. Kevin Baronowsky (Carlo Ponti v. Kevin Baronowsky) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
CARLO PONTI f/k/a CARLO PONTI MAIORANO, Appellant,
v.
KEVIN BARONOWSKY, Appellee.
No. 4D2023-2859
[September 11, 2024]
Appeal of a nonfinal order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Michael A. Robinson, Judge; L.T. Case No. 18-021357 CACE (13).
Warren P. Gammill of Warren Gammill & Associates, P.L., Miami, for appellant.
Julissa Rodriguez of Shutts & Bowen LLP, Miami, David O. Batista of Shutts & Bowen LLP, Fort Lauderdale, and Melodie Khosrovani of Shutts & Bowen LLP, Tampa, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed.
CIKLIN and KUNTZ, JJ., concur. WARNER, J., dissents with opinion.
WARNER, J., dissenting.
Based upon my dissent in Federal Insurance Company v. Perlmutter, 376 So. 3d 24 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023), I would reverse the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion to add a claim for punitive damages, as the trial court weighed the evidence and made credibility determinations, which should have been properly left to the jury. The plaintiff’s proffer of evidence to support its claim for punitive damages was adequate.
* * *
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Carlo Ponti v. Kevin Baronowsky, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carlo-ponti-v-kevin-baronowsky-fladistctapp-2024.