Health First, Inc. v. Cataldo
92 So. 3d 859
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Cataldo sued Health First, Inc. and Ori for injuries from a low-speed rear-end collision in Indialantic, Florida; Health First admitted Ori was acting within the course and scope of employment; liability issue resolved in favor of Cataldo on damages.
- Cataldo withdrew her brain and dental injury claims on the eve of trial, seeking to bar related evidence as collateral; defense sought a continuance which was denied, and mistrial motions were denied later.
- Trial spanned two weeks; plaintiffs proved cervical and thoracic spine injuries and depression; life-care and lost-wage analyses supported substantial damages.
- Defendants argued the withdrawal prejudiced their defense by impairing cross-examination and evidence of claimed fabrication; the court allowed withdrawal and excluded impeachment evidence on the withdrawn claims.
- After trial, Cataldo obtained an award of damages and moved for attorney’s fees under two offers of settlement; the court awarded $440,165 in fees plus $10,250 in expert fees.
- Two offers for settlement to Health First and Ori were deemed valid and enforceable; settlement terms included releases and nonmonetary terms; the trial court denied reversal on this issue.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Withdrawal of brain and dental claims | Cataldo’s withdrawal was permissible and not an abuse of discretion | Withdrawal deprived defense of impeachment evidence | No abuse; continuance denied; impeachment evidence properly excluded as collateral. |
| Improper closing arguments | Closing urged justice and fairness; defense harmed by inflammatory remarks | Arguments were improper but not outcome-determinative | No new trial; Murphy four-factor test not satisfied. |
| Offers of judgment and attorney’s fees | Offers were clear and nonmonetary terms properly described | Offers were ambiguous or joint; not enforceable for fee award | Offers valid; fee award affirmed for Cataldo. |
Key Cases Cited
- Murphy v. International Robotic Systems, Inc., 766 So.2d 1010 (Fla.2000) (unobjected closing argument standards; four-factor test for new trial)
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Revuelta, 901 So.2d 877 (Fla.3d DCA 2005) (prohibits improper argument; limits on inflammatory comments)
- Andrews v. Frey, 66 So.3d 376 (Fla.5th DCA 2011) (offers of judgment; joint offer issue described and distinguished)
- State Farm Mut. Ins. Co. v. Nichols, 932 So.2d 1067 (Fla.2006) (clarity required in offers of judgment; nonmonetary terms must be particularized)
- Patterson v. Allstate Ins. Co., 884 So.2d 178 (Fla.2d DCA 2004) (absolute right to withdraw claims; impact on trial strategy)