138 So. 3d 474
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2014Background
- Provident issued a disability policy to Genovese with lifetime benefits if totally disabled before Nov 19, 1997; after that, benefits until age 65.
- Genovese claimed total disability; physician evidence indicated onset on Nov 14, 1997; hospitalization on Dec 8, 1997.
- Genovese I was a declaratory action; jury verdict form included a special interrogatory finding Genovese totally disabled and the onset date.
- Genovese II sought breach of contract; Provident invoked collateral estoppel based on Genovese I’s onset finding.
- Genovese II trial yielded a verdict of onset Nov 14, 1997; Genovese I judgment did not explicitly include the Dec 8, 1997 onset.
- Trial court denied Provident’s directed verdict; appellate court reversed, holding collateral estoppel applied and remanding for entry of verdict for Provident.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Collateral estoppel applies to onset date? | Genovese: onset date not litigated in Genovese I. | Provident: identical issue litigated; essential to Genovese I. | Yes; onset date was identical and litigated. |
| Full and fair opportunity to litigate onset date? | Genovese: no full opportunity since not framed as issue. | Provident: parties debated onset, evidenced by trial proceedings. | Yes; full and fair opportunity existed. |
| Omission in Genovese I judgment precludes estoppel? | Genovese: lack of explicit onset in judgment prevented appeal/estoppel. | Provident: omission was strategist choice; not fatal to estoppel. | No; estoppel unaffected by omission. |
Key Cases Cited
- Engle v. Liggett Group, Inc., 945 So.2d 1246 (Fla.2006) (issue preclusion scope for partial litigation)
- Rice-Lamar v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 853 So.2d 1125 (Fla.4th DCA 2003) (preclusion does not require entire claim litigated)
- Club & Cmty. Consulting Corp. v. Brown, 728 So.2d 822 (Fla.4th DCA 1999) (issue preclusion focuses on litigated issue)
- Porter v. Saddlebrook Resorts, Inc., 679 So.2d 1212 (Fla.2d DCA 1996) (critical/necessary part of prior determination)
- Acadia Partners, L.P. v. Tompkins, 673 So.2d 487 (Fla.5th DCA 1996) (definition of lititable issue for collateral estoppel)
- Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Indus. Contracting Co., 260 So.2d 860 (Fla.4th DCA 1972) (use of verdict forms to identify litigated issues)
- Gupton v. Village Key & Saw Shop, Inc., 656 So.2d 475 (Fla.1995) (strategic drafting affects appealability)
- Held v. Held, 617 So.2d 358 (Fla.4th DCA 1993) (appellate review limitations on factual findings)
- Taylor v. Bateman, 927 So.2d 1024 (Fla.4th DCA 2006) (judgment drafting implications in appeals)
- Zimmerman v. Fla. Office of Ins. Regulation, 865 So.2d 1253 (Fla.2004) (defining collateral estoppel elements)