Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. Sylvia John

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. Sylvia John

150 So. 3d 1231, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 18945, 2014 WL 6460516

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 19, 2014

Docket4D14-1892

StatusPublished

This text of 150 So. 3d 1231 (Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. Sylvia John) 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

Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. Sylvia John, 150 So. 3d 1231, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 18945, 2014 WL 6460516 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We grant the petition for writ of certio-rari and quash the April 24, 2014 order granting respondent’s motion to compel production. On remand, the circuit, court shall conduct an in camera review to determine whether the October 11, 2009 incident report is protected by the work product privilege. If the court determines that the document is so protected, it shall not order production unless respondent makes a “showing that [respondent] has need of the materials in the preparation of the case and is unable without undue hardship to obtain the substantial equivalent of the materials by other means.” Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.280(b)(4); see also Publix Super Mkts., Inc. v. Anderson, 92 So.3d 922, 928 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); Lloyd’s Underwriters at London v. El-Ad Villagio Cond. Ass’n, 976 So.2d 28, 28 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).

STEVENSON, GROSS and GERBER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We grant the petition for writ of certio-rari and quash the April 24, 2014 order granting respondent’s motion to compel production. On remand, the circuit, court shall conduct an in camera review to determine whether the October 11, 2009 incident report is protected by the work product privilege. If the court determines that the document is so protected, it shall not order production unless respondent makes a “showing that [respondent] has need of the materials in the preparation of the case and is unable without undue hardship to obtain the substantial equivalent of the materials by other means.” Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.280(b)(4); see also Publix Super Mkts., Inc. v. Anderson, 92 So.3d 922, 928 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); Lloyd’s Underwriters at London v. El-Ad Villagio Cond. Ass’n, 976 So.2d 28, 28 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).

STEVENSON, GROSS and GERBER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

150 So. 3d 1231, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 18945, 2014 WL 6460516, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/publix-super-markets-inc-v-sylvia-john-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack