Florida Power & Light Co. v. Porter

Florida Circuit Courts

Florida Power & Light Co. v. Porter

6 Fla. Supp. 2d 141

CourtCircuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida

DecidedJune 19, 1984

DocketCase No. 81-252 CA

StatusPublished

This text of 6 Fla. Supp. 2d 141 (Florida Power & Light Co. v. Porter) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Circuit Court for the Judicial Circuits of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Florida Power & Light Co. v. Porter, 6 Fla. Supp. 2d 141 (Fla. Super. Ct. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

RICHARD O. WATSON, Circuit Judge.

This cause was heard upon Plaintiffs Motion to Strike Defendants’ Claim for Business Damages and to Exclude Evidence Thereof.

The Court considered the memorandums and argument of counsel and finds the issue controlled by the case of Florida Power and Light v. First National Bank and Trust Company of Riviera Beach, 448 [142]*142So.2d 1141 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) [9 FLW 828], opinion filed April 11th, 1984.

The Court considered Defendants’ claim that Section 73.071(3)(b) is unconstitutional. The First National Bank and Trust Company case did not consider the constitutionality of the statute. If the Court were to find the statute unconstitutional, that would eliminate the recovery of business damages. The Court is without authority to add to the statute a nonpublic body as an entity required to pay business damages.

It is therefore,

ORDERED

1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike is granted.

2. Defendants’ claim for business damages set forth in paragraph 2 of Defendants’ affirmative defenses and paragraph b of their prayer for relief is stricken.

3. The Court will rule on proffered evidence during the trial upon proper objection.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION OF THE COURT

RICHARD O. WATSON, Circuit Judge.

This cause was heard upon Plaintiffs Motion to Strike Defendants’ Claim for Business Damages and to Exclude Evidence Thereof.

The Court considered the memorandums and argument of counsel and finds the issue controlled by the case of Florida Power and Light v. First National Bank and Trust Company of Riviera Beach, 448 [142]*142So.2d 1141 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) [9 FLW 828], opinion filed April 11th, 1984.

The Court considered Defendants’ claim that Section 73.071(3)(b) is unconstitutional. The First National Bank and Trust Company case did not consider the constitutionality of the statute. If the Court were to find the statute unconstitutional, that would eliminate the recovery of business damages. The Court is without authority to add to the statute a nonpublic body as an entity required to pay business damages.

It is therefore,

ORDERED

1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike is granted.

2. Defendants’ claim for business damages set forth in paragraph 2 of Defendants’ affirmative defenses and paragraph b of their prayer for relief is stricken.

3. The Court will rule on proffered evidence during the trial upon proper objection.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Fla. Supp. 2d 141, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florida-power-light-co-v-porter-flacirct-1984.

Opinion

1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike is granted.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack