Joaquin Alexandre Coll v. 11USAGROUP, LLC

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 23, 2025
Docket3D2023-1220
StatusPublished

This text of Joaquin Alexandre Coll v. 11USAGROUP, LLC (Joaquin Alexandre Coll v. 11USAGROUP, LLC) 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.

Bluebook
Joaquin Alexandre Coll v. 11USAGROUP, LLC, (Fla. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed April 23, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D23-1220 Lower Tribunal No. 21-26046 ________________

Joaquin Alexandre Coll, et al., Appellants,

vs.

11USAGroup, LLC, et al., Appellees.

An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Vivianne Del Rio, Judge.

The Scharf Appellate Group, and Erik W. Scharf; Kawel PLLC, and Andrew Paul Kawel, for appellants.

Kelley Legal, and Marissa D. Kelley and Dylan M. Fulop (Fort Lauderdale), for appellees.

Before LOGUE, C.J., and SCALES and BOKOR, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Appellants Joaquin Alexandre Coll and Victoria Teng-Le appeal an

order denying their motion to amend their complaint to add claims for punitive

damages. We conclude Appellants failed to make a reasonable showing

which would provide a reasonable basis for recovery of punitive damages. §

768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2024). Therefore, the trial court properly performed its

gatekeeping function. See Palm Bay Towers Condo. Ass’n v. Marrazza, 50

Fla. L. Weekly D104, at *2 (Fla. 3d DCA Jan. 2, 2025) (“Thus, the trial court

serves as a ‘gatekeeper,’ whose function is to assess whether there is a

reasonable evidentiary basis for recovery.” (citing Gattorno v. Souto, 390 So.

3d 134, 137 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024))).

In reaching this conclusion, we do not diminish the claims made, or the

injuries allegedly suffered, by the Appellants. “Nevertheless, there is nothing

in the showing made by [Appellants] in this case which makes a reasonable

showing that [Appellees’] actions were of a ‘gross and flagrant character,

evincing reckless disregard of human life, or of the safety of persons exposed

to its dangerous effects.’” Five Fran, LLC v. Davis, 50 Fla. L. Weekly D136,

at *3 (Fla. 3d DCA Jan. 8, 2025) (quoting Est. of Despain v. Avante Grp.,

Inc., 900 So. 2d 637, 640 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (“To merit an award of punitive

damages, the defendant’s conduct must transcend the level of ordinary

negligence and enter the realm of willful and wanton misconduct.”)).

2 Affirmed.

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

Related

Estate of Despain v. Avante Group, Inc.
900 So. 2d 637 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Joaquin Alexandre Coll v. 11USAGROUP, LLC, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/joaquin-alexandre-coll-v-11usagroup-llc-fladistctapp-2025.