Summary Judgment Granted to School Board in Bus Stop Accident Case
David Delaney and Elizabeth McKillop recently obtained a dismissal with prejudice on behalf of a school board. The case involved an accident where a student was struck by a vehicle near a school bus stop. The Plaintiff’s complaint alleged that the school district has a legal duty to monitor or control the behavior of students at a school bus stop prior to the arrival of the school bus. The Plaintiff also claimed that the bus stop was in a dangerous location. Mr. Delaney and Ms. McKillop convinced the court that under Florida law relating to sovereign immunity, a school board’s duty of care for a student stems from its physical custody of a student, and without such physical custody, a school board’s duty of care is not triggered.
[ learn more about David M. Delaney, learn more about Elizabeth S. McKillop]
First District Court of Appeal Declares Farm Tractor Is Not a Dangerous Instrumentality
In Rippy v. Shepard, the Plaintiff sued for damages caused when the Defendant's farm tractor ran over the Plaintiff. The tractor was being driven by a third party and the plaintiff claimed that Mr. Shepard was liable under the dangerous instrumentality law. The trial court dismissed the claim and the plaintiff appealed. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal, agreeing with Dell Graham's position that farm tractors were not dangerous instrumentalities under Florida law. The matter was handled in both the trial and appellate courts by
Jennifer Lester.
[
learn more about Jennifer Lester ]
Summary Judgment Granted in Slip and Fall Case
Jennifer Lester moved for summary judgment in a slip and fall case after realizing the Plaintiff had failed to name the correct entity as a defendant and thus, failed to file her claim with the statute of limitations. The trial court agreed with her, and granted summary final judgment for the defendant.
[
learn more about Jennifer Lester ]
Summary Judgment Awarded in Alleged Baker Act and Marchman Act Violations Case
Dale J. Paleschic and
Elizabeth M. Collins successfully argued a motion for summary judgment on behalf of their clients, two psychiatrists and a local hospital. The Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claims that he was injured and his rights were violated because he was held in excess of the 72 hours allowed for an examination to be conducted to determine if the Plaintiff was mentally ill. Mr. Paleschic and Ms. Collins successfully demonstrated to the Court that the Plaintiff was receiving emergency medical care during the bulk of his confinement and that although the Plaintiff was originally held under Florida’s Baker Act, he was subsequently felt to have potential substance issues and could be held an additional 72 hours for under the provisions of Florida’s Marchman Act for a substance abuse evaluation.
[
learn more about Dale J. Paleschic,
learn more about Elizabeth M. Collins, ]
Defense Verdict obtained in Mud-Bogging Case
Susan Seigle and
Kevin McNeill recently received a defense jury verdict in Lake City, Florida. The Plaintiff alleged that he was injured in a one-car crash on a country road that had mud tracked onto the road from a mud-bogging event that had been held earlier that evening on a field adjacent to the road. The Defendants, who owned the land where the event was held, contended that when the event concluded that night, the only mud on the road was what would be expected on a wet highway from the dirt-road entrance onto the field. After the three day trial, the six-woman jury deliberated just over an hour before returning a defense verdict.
[
learn more about Susan Seigle ,
learn more about Kevin McNeill ]
Dell Graham Expands Healthcare Law Practice
Dell Graham is pleased to announce that healthcare attorney
Mark Thomas has joined the firm. Mr. Thomas focuses his practice on
healthcare defense, regulation and compliance. With almost 25 years of experience in health law and operations, he provides litigation and business services for a wide variety of medical providers, insurers and pharmaceutical/device manufacturers. Mr. Thomas is board certified healthcare law and specializes in compliance audits of provider arrangements, and representation of healthcare entities before government agencies. His clients include some of the country’s largest hospital systems, multi-specialty physician groups, and health maintenance organizations.
[
learn more about Mark S. Thomas ,
learn more about Healtcare Regulation & Compliance at Dell Graham. ]
Summary Judgment Granted for Horse Ranch Operator
David Delaney and
Elizabeth McKillop successfully argued a motion for summary judgment on behalf of their client, the owner of a horse ranch. At the hearing, the Court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claims that he was injured while attempting to load a horse into a trailer after purchasing it from the Defendant. The Plaintiff charged that the rancher’s employees failed to provide any assistance in loading the horse. The Plaintiff also alleged that the Defendant failed to warn Plaintiff of the horse’s temperamental disposition and dangerous propensities.
Mr. Delaney and Ms. McKillop defended the case with Florida’s Equine Activities statute. This law protects ranch owners, horse farms, and other sponsors of equine activities against personal injury claims when certain notice provisions are followed.
[
learn more about David M. Delaney,
learn more about Elizabeth S. McKillop]
Sexual Abuse Cases Resolved via Summary Judgment After Favorable Ruling for Defense at Frye Hearing
In several consolidated cases arising out of alleged physical and sexual abuse at a church school and camp,
Carl Schwait and
Elizabeth Collins obtained favorable rulings upon summary judgment on the basis that the claims were time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations. The plaintiffs claimed that that accrual of their negligence claims and the running of the statute of limitations was delayed because “dissociative amnesia” (also referred to as “repressed memories” or “traumatic amnesia”) prevented them from remembering the alleged abuse against them and from discovering their claimed injury until many years later. Following an evidentiary hearing pursuant to
Frye v. U.S., 293 F. 1013 (D.C. Cir. 1923), the circuit court held that plaintiffs failed to show by a preponderance of evidence that the existence of “repressed memories” is generally accepted in the relevant scientific community. A subsequent appeal by the plaintiffs was abandoned.
[
learn more about Carl B. Schwait, learn more about Elizabeth M. Collins ]
