Kohl v. Stutzke

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kohl v. Stutzke

554 So. 2d 642, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7294, 1989 WL 155669

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 28, 1989

DocketNo. 89-2631

StatusPublished

This text of 554 So. 2d 642 (Kohl v. Stutzke) 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

Kohl v. Stutzke, 554 So. 2d 642, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7294, 1989 WL 155669 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

POLEN, Judge.

This cause is before us on a petition for writ of certiorari directed to the trial court’s order, requiring petitioner to produce at trial information as to his finances and net worth. Petitioner was sued as a general partner of Deerfield Groves Partnership, for tortious interference, seeking compensatory and punitive damages. The order from which this petition ensued required petitioner to produce at trial records of his personal finances and net worth. These documents would be subject to production and presentation to the jury only if plaintiff in the trial court first made out a prima facie case for punitive damages.

Petitioner has not demonstrated the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law, nor has he shown any harm which would not be addressable on a plenary appeal. Indeed, if the plaintiff at trial is unable to make out a prima facie case for punitive damages against this petitioner, the issue will become moot. On the other hand, if the plaintiff makes a prima facie case and the personal financial documents are placed in evidence, leading to an adverse verdict, petitioner may then seek review on direct appeal. Accordingly, we deny the petition for certiorari. Martin-Johnson, Inc. v. Savage, 509 So.2d 1097 (Fla.1987).

DOWNEY and LETTS, JJ., concur.

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

POLEN, Judge.

This cause is before us on a petition for writ of certiorari directed to the trial court’s order, requiring petitioner to produce at trial information as to his finances and net worth. Petitioner was sued as a general partner of Deerfield Groves Partnership, for tortious interference, seeking compensatory and punitive damages. The order from which this petition ensued required petitioner to produce at trial records of his personal finances and net worth. These documents would be subject to production and presentation to the jury only if plaintiff in the trial court first made out a prima facie case for punitive damages.

Petitioner has not demonstrated the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law, nor has he shown any harm which would not be addressable on a plenary appeal. Indeed, if the plaintiff at trial is unable to make out a prima facie case for punitive damages against this petitioner, the issue will become moot. On the other hand, if the plaintiff makes a prima facie case and the personal financial documents are placed in evidence, leading to an adverse verdict, petitioner may then seek review on direct appeal. Accordingly, we deny the petition for certiorari. Martin-Johnson, Inc. v. Savage, 509 So.2d 1097 (Fla.1987).

DOWNEY and LETTS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

554 So. 2d 642, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7294, 1989 WL 155669, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kohl-v-stutzke-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack