New Life Acres, Inc. v. Strickland

436 So. 2d 391
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 18, 1983
Docket83-939
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 436 So. 2d 391 (New Life Acres, Inc. v. Strickland) 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
New Life Acres, Inc. v. Strickland, 436 So. 2d 391 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Opinion

436 So.2d 391 (1983)

NEW LIFE ACRES, INC., a Florida Corporation and Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company, Petitioners,
v.
Richard Wayne STRICKLAND and Debra Lynn Strickland, His Wife, Respondents.

No. 83-939.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

August 18, 1983.

Chobee Ebbets, of Smalbein, Eubank, Johnson, Rosier & Bussey, P.A., Daytona Beach, for petitioners.

Angus W. Harriett, Palatka, for respondents.

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

COBB, Judge.

The defendant carrier below, Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Company, obtained a statement from its insured driver during the course of its investigation of a vehicular collision, which was the basis for a subsequent law suit initiated by the respondents, Richard and Debra Strickland. The trial court, over the defense objection that a copy of such sworn statement of their insured was work product and therefore privileged from discovery, directed that said material be produced by the defense. Such a statement clearly is work product. Vann v. State, 85 So.2d 133 (Fla. 1956); Nationwide Insurance Company v. Monroe, 276 So.2d 547 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 283 So.2d 366 (Fla. 1973).

In their response to this court's order to show cause, the Stricklands have failed to indicate the applicability of any of the exceptions set forth in Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(2) to the general rule that the work product of a party is privileged from discovery. See Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Nakutis, 435 So.2d 307 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983) and Cavalere v. Graham, 423 So.2d 428 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).

The trial court's order departs from the essential requirements of law. Therefore, the Petition for Writ of Certiorari is granted, and the order compelling discovery is quashed.

*392 PETITION GRANTED; ORDER QUASHED.

DAUKSCH and COWART, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Selton v. Nelson
201 So. 3d 827 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016)
Federal Exp. Corp. v. Cantway
778 So. 2d 1052 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Waste Management, Inc. v. SOUTHERN BELL TEL. AND TEL. CO.
544 So. 2d 1133 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
West American Insurance Co. v. Neva Products, Inc.
490 So. 2d 117 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1986)
Fla. Cypress Gardens, Inc. v. Murphy
471 So. 2d 203 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
436 So. 2d 391, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/new-life-acres-inc-v-strickland-fladistctapp-1983.