State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Barczak

296 So. 2d 493, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 6947
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJune 18, 1974
DocketNo. 74-350
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 296 So. 2d 493 (State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Barczak) 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
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Barczak, 296 So. 2d 493, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 6947 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

Opinion

CARROLL, Judge.

In an action for damages for personal injuries the respondent John Charles Bar-czak obtained judgment against certain defendants and their insurer State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, the petitioner here. An appeal by the defendants from the judgment is pending before this court.

In a proceeding filed subsequent to the judgment by the respondent Barczak and others against State Farm incident to the matter, a motion by Barczak was granted requiring State Farm to produce its file relating to the cause, being matter which it is conceded would not have been subject to a discovery order to produce in the main case, but which it appears would be proper to be required to be produced for purposes of the supplementary action or proceeding.

However, the petitioner State Farm contends, and we agree, that to require such production by it before disposition of the appeal from the damage action judgment would be prejudicial to the petitioner and the other defendants in the main action in event the pending appeal should result in reversal of the judgment and an order for a new trial.

In such circumstances we hold the interest of justice will best be served by defer[494]*494ring the order to produce until after the pending appeal from the judgment is decided, and for the order to produce then to be enforced, or otherwise disposed of, as may appear proper based on the outcome of the pending appeal. To that extent, and to serve that purpose, certiorari is granted and the order in question is quashed.

It is so ordered.

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

Related

Lauda v. HF Mason Equipment Corp.
407 So. 2d 392 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Koken v. American Service Mutual Insurance Co., Inc.
330 So. 2d 805 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
296 So. 2d 493, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 6947, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-farm-mutual-automobile-insurance-v-barczak-fladistctapp-1974.