Raymond Galusha v. Lowes Home Centers, LLC, and Ann Shuler Waters

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 4, 2025
Docket5D2024-1507
StatusPublished

This text of Raymond Galusha v. Lowes Home Centers, LLC, and Ann Shuler Waters (Raymond Galusha v. Lowes Home Centers, LLC, and Ann Shuler Waters) 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
Raymond Galusha v. Lowes Home Centers, LLC, and Ann Shuler Waters, (Fla. Ct. App. 2025).

Opinion

FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________

Case No. 5D2024-1507 LT Case No. 2018-CA-000763-A _____________________________

RAYMOND GALUSHA,

Appellant,

v.

LOWES HOME CENTERS, LLC, and ANN SHULER WATERS,

Appellees. _____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Citrus County. Edward L. Scott, Judge.

Raymond Galusha, Inverness, pro se.

Christopher J. Blain, of Vernis & Bowling of the Gulf Coast, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee, Lowes Home Centers, LLC.

No Appearance for Appellee, Ann Shuler Waters.

April 4, 2025

EDWARDS, C.J.

Appellant, Raymond Galusha, appeals the order and final judgment dismissing his personal injury case against Appellee, Lowes Home Centers, LLC. Following an evidentiary hearing, his case was dismissed because the trial court found that Appellant committed fraud on the court.1 Put quite simply, he was found to have lied about matters permeating the entire case, matters that went to the very core of his case. His case was properly thrown out of court. Appellant gave three different dates on which the single injury-causing event, a claimed avalanche of garbage can lids, allegedly occurred. According to Appellee’s proof and the trial court’s findings—that event never occurred. Through fabrication, false testimony, and concealment, Appellant sentiently engineered and engaged in an unconscionable scheme to defraud Appellee and the judicial process by denying prior and subsequent relevant events, injuries, and treatment. We find that the evidence presented to and relied upon by the trial court was clear, convincing, and overwhelming; the court’s findings were all based on competent, substantial evidence. Appellant did not come forward with contrary proof or any reasonable explanation, despite having ample opportunity during the hearing on Appellee’s motion to dismiss.2 The depth and breadth of Appellant’s scheme to defraud infected every aspect of his claim; thus, dismissal of the entire case was absolutely appropriate. The trial court got it right on the facts, law, and remedy. See Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corp., 892 F.2d 1115, 1118 (1st Cir. 1989); McKnight v. Evancheck, 907 So. 2d 699, 700 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Cox v. Burke, 706 So. 2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). We affirm.

Because Appellant filed meritless briefs that failed to provide a scintilla of cogent analysis or argument, failed to supply an adequate record, and completely failed to show that the trial court abused its discretion or committed any legal error, we are sua sponte imposing sanctions pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2024).

The Incredible Proceedings Below

1 The derivative consortium claim of Appellant’s wife, Ann Shuler Waters, was also dismissed; however, she did not appeal. 2 Appellant failed to provide this Court with the transcript of

the motion to dismiss hearing, even after Appellee pointed out its absence.

2 To give a clear picture of the unconscionable conduct engaged in below by Appellant, we set forth in its entirety and adopt as part of our opinion the trial court’s order and final judgment dismissing Appellant’s case:

3 RAYMOND GALUSHA vs. LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, LLC LT. CASE NO: 2018 CA 000763 A DIVCA HT. CASE NO: 5D2024-1507 Official Records Citrus County FL, Angela Vick, Clerk of the Circuit Court & Comptroller #2024033279 BK: 3473 PG: 2237 6/5/2024 1:21 PM 3 Receipt: 2024029191

case with interrogatories, request for production, and depositions. On July 5, 2023, the Plaintiff's

prior attorney, Morgan and Morgan, moved to withdraw from her representation, “due to

irreconcilable differences.” The Plaintiffs has elected to remain “pro se” since that time. The

Plaintiff informed the court that his wife, Dr. Ann Shuler Waters, JD Ph.D. Co-Plaintiff, has a

law degree and apparently is not a member of the Florida Bar, is helping him in the case

Plaintiff, Galusha, testified that he and his wife have sued people in a car wreck in California and

went to trial pro se and won

The Court conducted an evidentiary hearing, as required by law, on May 6, 2024. At the

hearing, the Defendant argued the facts and law contained in the Defendant’s Motion. The

Plaintiffs offered no evidence in response to the issues raised in the motion. The Plaintiff spent

most of the hearing complaining about defense counsel in a dispute over whether there is video

from the store. Counsel for Lowes advised the court first, Lowes denies that this event even

happened and that there is no video from the isle where the Plaintiff alleges this happened. That

the Plaintiff, Galusha’s injuries are from a different event that did not occur at Lowes. The court,

after reviewing the evidence agrees

Analysis and Ruling

“A trial court has the inherent authority to dismiss a law action when fraud has been

perpetuated on the court.” Simmons v. Henderson,_745 So. 2d 1031, 1032 (Fla. 2d DCA

1999) (affirming this principle, as that “power is indispensable to the proper administration of

justice,” but that power “should be cautiously and sparingly exercised and only upon a clear

showing of fraud, pretense, collusion, or similar wrongdoing”); see also Cox v. Burke,_706 So.

2d 43, 46 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). A court may only dismiss an action for fraud once an evidentiary

hearing has been held or there is other evidence to warrant dismissal. Howard v. Risch, 959 So.

2 645

4 4 RAYMOND GALUSHAvs. LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, LLC LT. CASE NO: 2018 CA 000763 A DIV CA HT. CASE NO: 5D2024-1507 Official Records Citrus County FL, Angela Vick, Clerk of the Circuit Court & Comptroller #2024033279 BK: 3473 PG: 2238 6/5/2024 1:21 PM 4 Receipt: 2024029191

2d 308, 311 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). Such a dismissal is one with prejudice. Saenz v. Pation

Transport, Inc., 969 So. 24 1145, 1145 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007); Cox,_706 So. 2d at 46,

Having reviewed the record, reviewing the exhibits and listened to the arguments of

Defendant's counsel and the Plaintiffs, the pro se litigants, at the evidentiary hearing, it is

apparent that there is a complete absence of evidence that the Plaintiff, Galusha, sustained an

injury inside the Defendant's store on December 22, 2017, the date alleged in his Complaint or

the other two dates the Plaintiff, Galusha, claims this happened, those being May 25, 2017 and

July of 2018. In fact, the medical evidence contradicts much, if not all the Plaintiff's sworn

testimony. The court has read the Defendant’s Motion, the exhibits A and C filed on April 5

2024, with the motion, the Plaintiff’s depositions dated December 11, 2019, and September 17,

2020. The other exhibits that were filed on April 9, 2024, including all the medical records which

support the dismissal in this case for fraud on the court

Plaintiff, Raymond Galusha, gave a deposition on December 11, 2019. He was

represented by counsel at the time. The testimony of the Plaintiff, Galusha, is that he went to

Lowes in July of 2018 around 9:00 am or 10:00 am, (Depo 12/11/19 pg.58, 59) to buy a garbage

can when this incident occurred. His complaint states at paragraph 6, this occurred on December

22, 2017. In the Plaintiff's sworn answers to interrogatories dated November 29, 2018, at

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

Related

Salim Aoude v. Mobil Oil Corporation
892 F.2d 1115 (First Circuit, 1989)
McKnight v. Evancheck
907 So. 2d 699 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Ramey v. Haverty Furniture Companies, Inc.
993 So. 2d 1014 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)
Long v. Swofford
805 So. 2d 882 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Cox v. Burke
706 So. 2d 43 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Simmons v. Henderson
745 So. 2d 1031 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Distefano v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.
846 So. 2d 572 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
Jesse v. Commercial Diving Academy of Jacksonville, Inc.
963 So. 2d 308 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2007)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Raymond Galusha v. Lowes Home Centers, LLC, and Ann Shuler Waters, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/raymond-galusha-v-lowes-home-centers-llc-and-ann-shuler-waters-fladistctapp-2025.