cemetery1.jpgWho can be compensated and the types of damages that are available when a person dies through the wrongful act or negligence in Florida of any person or company is prescribed by statute in the “Florida Wrongful Death Act,” sections 768.16 through 768.26. The chart below is a breakdown of section 768.21.

Wrongful Death claims are brought on behalf of statutory “survivors” by the Personal Representative of the decedent’s estate. The Personal Representative, typically a family member and often a survivor, is appointed by the court after due notice is given to all interested parties. The Personal Representative hires the attorney who will bring a claim to recover damages for the decedent’s estate and survivors. Florida wrongful death attorneys handle these cases on a contingent basis, meaning that attorney’s fees are paid only after a successful recovery has been made in the case. The standard within the legal industry is for the fee to be a percentage of the overall recovery, rather than being based on an hourly rate.

Who may recover under the Act and to what extent varies according to the circumstances of each case and can be confusing. There have been many legal challenges to the Act, yet it has survived all challenges essentially intact. At this point in time, it will take action from the Florida Legislature to change the Act.

The goal of this blog is to make the Act understandable. The chart shows the types of damages that can be recovered and by whom. Many of the variations and exceptions are counterintuitive and unfair. For example, a surviving spouse will preclude the recovery of any damages by the decedent’s parents. In addition, the Act gives special consideration to medical providers, in some instances putting them beyond the reach of the law for causing death by medical negligence/malpractice.

Spouse Dies – Surviving Spouse but no Surviving Children
Spouse’s Damages:

  • Loss of Decendent’s Companionship and Protection
  • Mental Pain and Suffering from date of injury
  • Loss of Support and Services from date of injury to date of death (w/ interest)
  • Future Loss of Support and Services from date of death (at present value)
  • Medical and Funeral Expenses due to decedent’s injury/death if paid by survivor

Spouse Dies with Surviving Children and Surviving Spouse
Spouse’s Damages:

  • Loss of Decendent’s Companionship and Protection
  • Mental Pain and Suffering from date of injury
  • Loss of Support and Services from date of injury to date of death (w/ interest)
  • Future Loss of Support and Services from date of death (at present value)
  • Medical and Funeral Expenses due to decedent’s injury/death if paid by survivor

Children’s Damages:

  • Loss of Support and Services from date of injury to date of death (w/ interest)
  • Future Loss of Support and Services from date of death (at present value)
  • Minor children only (under the age of 25 – Section 768.18(2) Florida Statutes), or all children if there is no surviving spouse, may also recover loss of parental companionship, instruction, and guidance and mental pain and suffering from date of the injury

Parent Dies with Surving Children but no Surviving Spouse
Surviving Children:

  • Loss of Support and Services from date of injury to date of death (w/interest)
  • Future Loss of Support and Services from date of death (at present value)
  • All children may recover loss of parental companionship, instruction, and guidance and mental pain and suffering from date of the injury

Continue reading

pothole.jpgMust a landowner warn a visitor to the property of an open and obvious pothole? Probably not. Does a landowner have a duty to repair the pothole? Probably.

In Burton v. MDC PGA Plaza Corp., 78 So.3d 732 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012), the plaintiff was seriously injured when, while loading a vehicle, she stepped into a pothole, tripped, and fell to the ground. The pothole was approximately one foot wide and two inches deep. The plaintiff conceded that she knew about the pothole before she fell.

Because the plaintiff knew about the pothole before she fell, the court ruled that the plaintiff could not maintain an action against the landowner Defendant MDC or its tenant, CVS. Summary judgment was granted for the defendants.
Continue reading

law books.jpgLittle known by most lay people is that every plaintiff involved in litigation, even those who appear to walk away with favorable judgments, may be subject to court sanctions in the form of paying the defendant’s attorneys fees.

The sanction can be imposed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442, known as the Proposal for Settlement rule. Under the PFS rule, if the plaintiff refuses a pretrial offer for 25% more than the case is worth, the plaintiff may have to pay the defendant’s attorneys fees incurred from the date of the offer through the trial of the case. (For purposes of this topic, the worth of a case is the amount of the final judgment. A final judgment is not the same thing as a verdict.)

The courts appear to have found an exception to the PFS rule for survivors in cases brought under Florida’s Wrongful Death Act.

In Kadlecik v. Haim, 79 S03d 892 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012), the court gave the following explanation for the exception:

Under Florida’s Wrongful Death Act, an estate’s personal representative brings all claims on behalf of both the estate and the decedent’s survivors. §§ 768.16-.26, Fla. Stat. (2010). The personal representative has the exclusive authority to conduct litigation and settle all claims. Thompson v. Hodson, 825 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Pearson v. DeLamerens, 656 So. 2d 217 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). The survivors are not parties to the wrongful death litigation, even when the claims are brought for their benefit. Accordingly, it is error to award attorneys’ fees against the survivors because the personal representative is the only person with authority to settle the claim and the individual survivors cannot be fairly said to have rejected an offer of settlement. See Beseau v. Bhalani, 904 So. 2d 641, 642 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (holding that entry of judgment against survivor was erroneous as, despite being individually named on complaint, she was not proper party to proceeding); Thompson, 825 So. 2d at 952 (holding that attorneys’ fees cannot be assessed against survivors in wrongful death action based on offer of judgment since personal representative alone has authority to settle and survivors cannot be said to have rejected offer of settlement).

Is the exception foolproof? At least one Florida lawyer, the renowned Dale Swope, of Swope, Rodante, P.A., in Tampa, has doubts. (His article on the subject is contained in the March/April 2012 #559 edition of the Journal, a magazine published for members of the Florida Justice Association.)
Continue reading

Used cars.jpgPurchasers of used goods, such as appliances and cars, often buy from dealers subject to the condition that the items are being sold “As Is.” Does this provision in a sale agreement insulate the seller from liability for personal injuries caused by a defect? Probably not.

Sellers use “As Is” disclaimers with the intention and expectation of disclaiming all warranties, both express and implied. To be valid, the disclaimers must meet certain requirements such as being written and conspicuousness within the written document.

An “As Is” disclaimer is not an exculpatory clause. An exculpatory clause relieves a party of tort liability. Because exculpatory clauses relieve parties of exercising due care, they are looked upon with disfavor in most states, including Florida. To be enforceable, an exculpatory clause must be so clear and understandable that “an ordinary and knowledgeable person will know what he is contracting away.”

accident scene.jpgTo promote the gathering of facts surrounding motor vehicle accidents, the Florida Legislature has devised a number of statutes each with the essential character of compelling certain individuals to disclose information to law enforcement personnel.

  • Florida Statute 316.066(1) requires a driver to make a report when involved in a crash where there is bodily injury, death, or damage to a vehicle
  • 361.062(1) requires a driver to give his or her information to a police officer upon request when a crash results in injury or death

Telephone pole1.jpgDuring the past 12 months we have represented a handful of former Southern Bell linemen injured in the course and scope of their employment. Each was hired by Southern Bell (subsequently Bellsouth, now AT&T) in the 1970s to repair and install telecommunication cable. They started working for Southern Bell in their 20s and stayed until being forced by orthopedic conditions to retire in 2010 and later.

Their orthopedic conditions were caused by years of wear and tear from climbing telephone polls while toting heavy equipment and cable. Instead of being allowed to use ladders or hydraulic lifts, the linemen were forced to shimmy the poles like island natives gathering coconuts from tall palm trees. Boot hooks, jammed into the wood poles, kept them from falling.

Our first Southern Bell lineman case involved a 61 year old gentleman who retired after 39 years, done in by bad knees. His orthopedist was recommending total knee replacement surgery.

Common sense and experience told us that his knee problems were job related. Unless there has been acute trauma, like a football injury, repetitive trauma beyond the ordinary is the usual cause for damage of this severity at such a relatively young age. 39 years of pole climbing qualifies as beyond ordinary wear and tear.
Continue reading

us supreme court.jpgThere are numerous procedural, substantive, and even attitudinal differences in the way civil cases are handled between State and Federal Courts. The differences can determine the outcome of a case.

In many instances, the line is sharp over which court system has jurisdiction, leaving little to no choice over which system will get the case. In others, however, legal maneuvering can dictate where a case will land. It is important, therefore, for lawyers to fully understand the factors that determine the outcome.

Given the significance of the outcome, parties to legal proceedings have always tussled over the jurisdiction issue, spawning a plethora of statutes and case law. Ironically, the many statutes and opinions on the subject have to a degree created more confusion than clarity.
Continue reading

people.jpgSuccess for the victim of a premises liability accident requires that he or she prove the defendant knew or should have known beforehand of the existence of the dangerous condition which caused the accident, and that the accident was foreseeable.

One of the most effective ways of establishing these elements is through similar prior accidents.

Most business establishments prepare incident reports following accidents. The reports contain accident details along with the victim’s name and contact information.

Once a lawsuit is filed, the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure allow the parties to obtain case relevant information, also known as discovery, from each other and non-parties. Subpoenas, depositions, and document requests are the common methods of obtaining information.

Typically, the prior incident reports themselves are not discoverable based on the privilege doctrine of being prepared in anticipation of litigation. However, defendants must provide detailed information about prior accidents, including victim names and contact information, date and location of incidents, and some description of what occurred. Publix Supermarkets, Inc. v. Martin, 739 So.2d 174 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).
Continue reading

cemetery1.jpgRead together, Florida Statute Section 95.11(4)(d) and Section 95.031(1) provide that an action for wrongful death, under Section 768.21 (known as Florida’s Wrongful Death Act), must be commenced within two (2) years of when the last element constituting the cause of action occurs. This is a strict standard that does not take into account the “delayed discovery” doctrine.

The “delayed discovery” doctrine tolls the statute of limitations until the plaintiff either knows or should know that the last element of the cause of action occurred. The only type of wrongful death action to which the doctrine applies and thus tolls the statute of limitations is one arising from medical negligence. See Section 95.11(4)(b). No other type of wrongful death claim is so tolled.

For example, in Raie v. Cheminova, Inc., 336 F. 3d 1278 – Court of Appeals, 11th Circuit 2003, a wrongful death claim based on products liability was barred even though the Personal Representative did not learn of the cause of death until four years after the decedent’s death.

Although not pertinent to wrongful death claims, the other types of actions to which the doctrine applies are:

  • Claims of fraud.
  • Products liability claims that result in injury but not death.
  • Professional malpractice (95.11(4)(a))
  • Intentional torts based on abuse (95.11(7)).

See Davis v. Monahan, 832 So.2d 708 (Fla., 2002).
Continue reading

Flame.jpgFamed products liability expert and author (Foreseeable Risk) Tom Taormina was interviewed on April 12, 2012 on WLRN public radio by Topical Currents host Joseph Cooper. The conversation centered on the dangers of everyday household electrical appliances such as toasters and microwaves, but his account of an artificial lighted Christmas tree that caused the death of four people is eye opening.

The 15 minute interview (listen here) will be enlightening to people who question the importance of having a vigorous civil justice system to punish manufacturers who produce dangerous products. According to Mr. Taormina, some manufacturers allow a dangerously high failure rate and the resulting lawsuits as the cost of doing business, rather than make their products safer at a greater cost.
Continue reading

Contact Information