Casey v. Mistral HOA et al. – Summary Final Judgment entered in favor of our HOA client finding the 3rd story balcony railing which Plaintiff fell through was unit owner and not condominium property as a matter of law, thereby finding my client owed Plaintiff no legal duty, after the Court determined the Declaration of Condominiums unambiguously stated that the south balconies were unit owner property. Our client served separate Proposals for Settlement to both Plaintiffs (injured and consortium) which had long-since expired, so we will move forward with taxing attorneys’ fees and costs.
Sweeney v. Islandview HOA – Summary Final Judgment entered in favor of our HOA client finding the homeowners’ claim which sought permission to build a house that failed to comply with the HOA restrictions had become moot after a related administrative action forced the homeowners to cease construction. Our client is entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs against both Sweeneys pursuant to both Chapter 720 and the Declaration of Condominiums, so have moved forward with taxing attorneys’ fees and costs. The ruling has already survived a motion for rehearing, but the case is now on appeal.
Durrah v. Twelve Oaks – In a reported decision, 2021 WL 4120802, Summary Final Judgment was entered in favor of our client property owner in a premises liability trip and fall case wherein the Court found the height differential at a sidewalk expansion joint to be so minimal as to be non-negligent as a matter of law. Earlier in the case, in another reported decision, 2020 WL 8910885, I successfully had the individual manager of the property, who had only been sued to defeat diversity, dismissed with prejudice based on the fraudulent joinder doctrine which allowed me to get the case into federal court. Our client had served a Proposal for Settlement which allowed me to avoid an appeal in exchange for a clean walk-away.
Munene v. Baytowne Wharf HOA et al. – Summary Final Judgment entered in favor of our client in a premises liability case in which a young child had his leg trapped under a carousel and was broken holding our client had no legally material connection to the carousel, and, therefore, owed the minor child no legal duty. Again, our client served separate Proposals for Settlement to both Plaintiffs (the parents) which had long-since expired, so we have moved forward with taxing attorneys’ fees and costs which I intend to collect through the other party defendants if and when they settle. This case is on appeal.
Gleason v. Jim Rossi and Mark Wrinn et al. – Order Granting Motion to Dismiss and 57.105 Motion for Sanctions made by my two clients, Jim Rossi and Mark Wrinn, arguing Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint had no basis in fact or law arising from alleged failure to make payment for construction remediation work. Following entry of the order, Plaintiff’s counsel paid, and the client was reimbursed, $1,500 in sanctions on top of the dismissal with prejudice for the 57.105 Motion.
Maulden v. Barnard – Plaintiff alleged our client accidentally stabbed Plaintiff in the eye with a pocketknife causing permanent vision problems. Our client maintained Plaintiff accidentally stabbed himself. The week before trial, Plaintiff agreed to voluntarily dismiss the case with prejudice if we waived our fees and costs claim, so we paid nothing.
Suleiman v. Filgeuira – Alleged auto accident wherein both Suleiman Plaintiffs presented personal injury claims; however, our client denied impacting Plaintiffs while behind them on the interstate. Weeks before trial, both Plaintiffs agreed to voluntarily dismiss their cases with prejudice if we waived our fees and costs claim, so we paid nothing.
Our team is available to discuss the topics written here and ready to provide additional information contained in this article. Contact us for more information.