CHILD SUPPORT
Valdes v. Valdes, ___ So. 2d ___, 34
An award of child support was reversed because the trial court failed to articulate findings regarding the actual or adjusted income of the parties. The appellate court remanded for the calculation of child support according to statutory guidelines.
WORKER’S COMPENSATION IMMUNITY
C.W. Roberts Contracting, Inc. v. Couchens, ___ So. 2d ___, 34
C.W. was hired as the general contractor to repave a landing strip at Egland Airforce Base, and C.W. hired Edge to remove the old asphalt from the base. The plaintiff’s husband was involved in a fatal accident while dumping a load of asphalt for Edge. C.W.’s contract with Edge required Edge to maintain workers’ compensation coverage for its employees, and Edge did so. Plaintiff made a workers’ compensation claim, received workers’ compensation benefits, and signed a release. Nevertheless, the plaintiff sued C.W. for negligence and intentional tort. The trial court should have granted C.W.’s motion for summary judgment based on worker’s compensation immunity. The plaintiff’s negligence claim was barred because C.W. qualified as the husband’s statutory employer. The intentional tort claim was barred because of the absence of expert testimony of a condition virtually certain to cause injury or death and the absence of other evidence that C.W. was aware of the virtual certainty of injury or death based on prior accidents or explicit warnings, that the husband was unaware of the risk, or that C.W. concealed or misrepresented the risk. [This case contains an excellent and concise summary of the law of worker’s compensation immunity.]
JUDICIAL DISQUALIFICATION
Aberdeen Property Owner’s Association, Inc. v. Bristol Lakes Homeowner’s Association, Inc., ___ So. 2d ___ 34
The trial judge should have disqualified himself because his personal situation aligned him with the plaintiff’s position on the primary issue to be determined in the litigation.
ARBITRATION
Tubbs v. Hudec, ___ So. 2d ___, 34
The arbitration provision in a stock purchase agreement applied to claims for indemnification. When the sellers did not receive required payments, they sued under unconditional personal guarantees. Because the lawsuit did not involve a claim for indemnification, the dispute was not arbitrable.
57.105
Anchor Towing, Inc. v. Florida Department of Transportation, ___ So. 2d ___, 34
A letter threatening to file a motion for attorney’s fees under Section 57.105, Florida Statutes, did not satisfy the notice requirement of the statute. The statute requires notice in the form of a motion rather than a letter, and the statute must be strictly construed because it is in derogation of the common law.
SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Torres v. MK Tours, Inc., ___ So. 2d ___, 34
The trial court erred by entering summary judgment for the defendant. The defendant destroyed documents, but the plaintiff did not find out about the missing documents because of the defendant’s discovery delays. As a result, the plaintiff was entitled to a continuance of the hearing on the defendant’s motion for summary judgment.
CHARGING LIEN
Hall, Lamb & Hall, P.A. v. Scherlon Investments Corp., ___ So. 2d ___, 34
Hall represented the defendant/counter-claimant in a lawsuit. When the client discharged Hall, Hall filed a notice of charging lien. After the notice was filed, the plaintiff entered into a settlement with the defendant and, without notice to Hall, paid all of the settlement funds to Hall’s successor, a disbarred attorney, who absconded with the funds. The trial court erred in denying Hall’s motion to adjudicate its charging lien against the plaintiff. Because the plaintiff was on notice of the charging lien, it was jointly and severely liable along with the former client and Hall’s successor.
STATUTE OF FRAUDS; SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY
City of
The City of
LOST DOCUMENTS
Environmental Services, Inc. v. Carter, ___ So. 2d ___, 34
The trial court should not have refused to enforce against a former employee a covenant not to compete merely because the written agreement was lost.
EXCITED UTTERANCES
Rodriguez v. State, ___ So. 2d ___, 34
A little girl ran out of an apartment, looking desperate and panicked, yelling that her father was killing her mother. The statement qualified as an excited utterance.
The mother stumbled out of the apartment with swollen eyes and a bleeding face. She got into a car, locked the door, and honked the horn. The father came out of the apartment and began screaming and banking on the car window, but he left the scene when the mother refused to open the car door. After the father left the scene, a witness approached the car, and the mother stated that her husband attacked her. When the deputies arrived, the mother was still in the car crying hysterically. She told the deputies that her husband hit her. The mother’s statements to the witness and the deputies qualified as excited utterances.
PAROL EVIDENCE; SPECIAL EQUITY IN MARITAL HOME
Syverson v. Jones, ___ So. 2d ___, 34
Parol evidence was inadmissible to construe a prenuptial agreement because the agreement was not ambiguous.
The husband was not entitled to a special equity in the marital home because of payments for homeowner’s association fees, home insurance, property taxes, and mortgage payment. “Where a home is held as a tenancy in the entireties, ‘both parties are obligated for the whole of any expenses or debts on the property (including mortgage payments and insurance).’ . . . Even though Husband no longer lived in the house and Wife had exclusive use of the property, Husband remained liable for the full amount. In making those payments, he did not make a contribution over and above his normal marital obligation.”
EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION
Stough v. Stough, ___ So. 2d ___, 34
The fact that the wife contributed more money to the marriage did not justify an unequal distribution of marital property.