Meadowbrook Health Care Services of Florida, Inc. v. Acosta

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Meadowbrook Health Care Services of Florida, Inc. v. Acosta

617 So. 2d 1104, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4972, 1993 WL 139757

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 4, 1993

DocketNos. 93-422, 93-562

StatusPublished

This text of 617 So. 2d 1104 (Meadowbrook Health Care Services of Florida, Inc. v. Acosta) 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

Meadowbrook Health Care Services of Florida, Inc. v. Acosta, 617 So. 2d 1104, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4972, 1993 WL 139757 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The court’s sanction of striking the defendant’s pleadings and entering a default judgment on liability is reversed as clearly excessive and disproportionate to Meadowbrook’s act of failing to comply with a discovery order while a motion for rehearing concerning the propriety of that order was still pending in this court. Wainscott v. Rindley, 610 So.2d 649 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); J.E.I. Airlines, Inc. v. Britton, Cassel, Schantz & Schatzman, P.A., 605 So.2d 1009 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).

Meadowbrook’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari to review the court’s order permitting financial discovery is denied. The plaintiff met the requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1991), by producing record evidence which would provide a reasonable basis for the recovery of punitive damages.

The order striking the defendant’s pleadings and entering a default judgment is reversed; the petition for certiorari to review an order permitting financial discovery is denied; and the cause is remanded for further consistent proceedings.

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

PER CURIAM.

The court’s sanction of striking the defendant’s pleadings and entering a default judgment on liability is reversed as clearly excessive and disproportionate to Meadowbrook’s act of failing to comply with a discovery order while a motion for rehearing concerning the propriety of that order was still pending in this court. Wainscott v. Rindley, 610 So.2d 649 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); J.E.I. Airlines, Inc. v. Britton, Cassel, Schantz & Schatzman, P.A., 605 So.2d 1009 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).

Meadowbrook’s Petition for Writ of Certiorari to review the court’s order permitting financial discovery is denied. The plaintiff met the requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1991), by producing record evidence which would provide a reasonable basis for the recovery of punitive damages.

The order striking the defendant’s pleadings and entering a default judgment is reversed; the petition for certiorari to review an order permitting financial discovery is denied; and the cause is remanded for further consistent proceedings.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

617 So. 2d 1104, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4972, 1993 WL 139757, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meadowbrook-health-care-services-of-florida-inc-v-acosta-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack