Uzuegbunamv. Preczewski, Case No. 19–968 (2021).
Nominal damages for claims arising under common law may be sufficient to confer Article III standing under Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 578U. S. 330 (2016).Ford Motor Co. v. Montana Eighth JudicialDistrict Court, Case No. 19–368 (2021).
Specific personal jurisdiction is based on whether the claims “arise out of or relate to” the forum state and not based on “causal link” when a defendant avails itself of the jurisdiction.Suvicmon Development, Inc. v. Morrison, Case No. 20-11681 (11th Cir. 2021).
A finding of non-dischargeability of a debt under 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(19) (violation of state securities laws) does not permit a creditor to recover on its fraudulent transfer claim against a discharged debtor; Owaski v. Jet Florida Systems, Inc. (In re Jet Florida Systems, Inc.), 883 F.2d 970 (11th Cir. 1989) (holder of a discharged claimthere a defamation claimant, could proceed nominally against the debtor for thepurpose of recovering from the debtor’s insurer) is inapplicable.King v. Zaslavskiy, Case No. 3D19-1921 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021).
The hearing of a motion for summary judgment should be continued to allow a party to revise their declaration in opposition (proper under federal practice but not Florida practice) and convert the declaration to an affidavit in opposition.Point Conversions, LLC v. WPB Hotel Partners, LLC, Case No. 4D19-3017 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).
A state court has jurisdiction over a suit in which there are federal patent law questions when the claim does not “arise” under federal law and does not meet the four-part requirements of Gunn v. Minton, 568 U.S. 251 (2013).Christ v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Company Americas, Case No. 2D19-4131 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021).
A witness testifying as to the admissibility of business records of a third party must either be able to testify from personal knowledge or knowledge of the third party’s routine or general business practices.George Anderson Training and Consulting, Inc. v. Miller Bey Paralegal & Financing, LLC, Case No. 2D19-4413 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021).
A deed by a corporation is valid if signed by the president, vice-president, or chief executive officer but only if the deed is sealed with the common or corporate seal. Moreover, a deed generally cannot be witnessed by a grantee and a notary may not notarize her own signature.Bond v. Luzinski,Case No. 2D20-1510 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021).
An assignee under Florida Statutes Chapter 727 has the power to consent to venue over the objection of the officers and directors of the company whose assets were assigned.Mori v. Fortune Capital Partners, Inc., Case Nos. 3D19-1194 and 3D19-1359 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021).
A grantee of a contract for purchase of real property, which contract states the grantee may accept the property with the title defects the grantor was not able to cure or cancel the contract, may not obtain specific performance with abatement.Calderin v. Quartz Hill Mining, LLC, Case No. 3D20-1612 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021).
A bankruptcy debtor’s legal malpractice claim against its attorneys is subject to concurrent jurisdiction between bankruptcy and state courts.Share v. Broken Sound Club, Inc., Case No. 4D20-1244 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).
The Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing cannot be used to vary the terms of written corporate documents, and the Business Judgment Rule applies to the corporate decisions of not-for-profit corporate clubs, including membership decisions.Simon v. Homeowners Choice Property & Casualty Insurance Company, Inc., Case No. 2D18-1116 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021).
If a party is added after the lawsuit is filed, the date for determining when a proposal for settlement is timely is the date the new party is added and not the date of the filing of the lawsuit.Kratos Investments LLC v. ABS Healthcare Services, LLC, Case No. 3D20-1280 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021).
A non-signatory to an arbitration agreement may compel a signatory to arbitrate a dispute between them when signatory’s allegations against the non-signatory are intertwined with the issues set forth in the contract containing the arbitration agreement.Rauch, Weaver, Norfleet, Kurtz & Co., Inc. v. AJP Pine Island Warehouses, Inc., Case Nos. 4D20-352 and 4D20-417 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).
A confidentiality agreement may constitute a restraint of trade under Florida Statute section 542.335, and if so, a party seeking to enforce the agreement must meet the pleading requirements of the statute section.Bezl Limited, LLC v. Raymond Office Plaza, LLC, Case No. 4D20-743 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).
A circuit’s court entry of final judgment of possession for failure to make rent deposits under Florida Statute section 83.232(5) does not extinguish other existing claims between the landlord and tenant.Pezeshkan v. Manhattan Construction Florida,Inc., Case No. 2D20-2184 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021).
A non-signatory to a stock purchase agreement which contains an arbitration provision may not compel arbitration of appraisal rights under Florida Statute section 607.1301 when the non-signatory was not an intended third-party beneficiary of the stock purchase agreement and when there is no nexus between the stock purchase agreements and invocation of appraisal rights.Jackman v. Cebrink-Swartz, Case No. 2D20-2384 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021).
Neighbors placing a camera on their roof which looks into the adjoining neighbor’s house and records same commits the tort of invasion of privacy (seclusion), which tort does not require publication of the information to a third party.Fallang Family Limited Partnership v. Privcap Companies, LLC, Case No. 4D20-548 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).
While incorporation of the rules of the American Arbitration Association may shift the questionof arbitrability from the court to the arbitration panel, reference alone to the rules is not sufficient by itself to shift the question; conflict certified with Mia. Marlins, L.P. v. Miami-DadeCty., 276 So. 3d 936, 940 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019); Glasswall, LLC v. Monadnock Constr., Inc.,187 So. 3d 248, 251 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016); and Reunion W. Dev. Partners, LLLP v. Guimaraes, 221 So. 3d 1278, 1280 (Fla.5th DCA 2017).Kemp Investments North, LLC v. Engler, Case No. 5D20-1553 (Fla. 5th DCA 2021).
Notwithstanding that buyer signed a notice at closing that the attorney was not representing her, an attorney and title agent who represents the seller at closing is prohibited from representing the buyer in a dispute over a fraudulent deed if the attorney has later discussions with the buyer regarding the ramifications of the deed.
