Sottilaro v. Figueroa
2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 1787
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2012Background
- Sottilaro defendants appeal a final judgment in a wrongful death suit brought by the Estate of Christopher Cepeda.
- Cepeda was struck and killed by Denise Sottilaro while crossing U.S. 27; Cepeda’s location at impact was disputed.
- Jury allocated fault 70% Sottilaro, 30% Cepeda; damages awarded: past medical bills $50,733.59; pain and suffering $1.325 million.
- Trial court excluded impeachment evidence from witnesses by invoking the accident report privilege, based on a legal interpretation of the statute.
- Defense sought to use a deputy’s traffic fatality report and witness statements; witnesses' prior statements were redacted; new-trial motion followed the verdict.
- Court reverses the judgment and remands for a new trial, and reverses the trial court’s award of costs; other appeal issues become moot.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether accident report privilege extends to non-involved witnesses. | Sottilaro argues witnesses’ statements fall within privilege. | Sottilaro contends statute covers only those required to report. | Privilege does not extend to non-involved witnesses; reversed for new trial. |
| Whether impeachment testimony was properly excluded. | Sottilaro asserts impeachment material was admissible. | Sottilaro relies on privilege to bar impeachment. | Trial court erred by excluding impeachment testimony; remand for new trial. |
| Whether costs should be awarded to the Estate given remand for new trial. | Estate seeks costs predicate on prevailing party. | Costs awarded below reversed due to remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- McTevia v. Schrag, 446 So.2d 1183 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (accident-report privilege limited to those required to report; witnesses not required to report may testify)
- Williams v. Scott, 153 So.2d 18 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963) (pedestrian statement admissibility under accident-report privilege distinguished from drivers)
- Coffey, 212 So.2d 632 (Fla. 1962) (privilege limited to reports by persons required to report; non-reporting witnesses not protected)
- Edge, 397 So.2d 939 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (accident-report privilege interpretation cases supporting limited scope)
- Lobree v. Caporossi, 139 So.2d 510 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962) (expressio unius est exclusio alterius; privilege limited to report-makers)
- Brackin v. Boles, 452 So.2d 540 (Fla. 1984) (statutory immunity tied to reporting duties under §316.066; privilege for reporters)
- Cino, 931 So.2d 164 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (statutory accident report privilege does not bar officer testimony from others not subject to self-incrimination)