Defendant's Attorney: Tampa, Florida Insurance defense lawyers represented the Defendant.

Description: Tampa, Florida personal injury lawyer represented the Plaintiff who sued the Defendant on a premises liability negligence theory claiming to have suffered more than $75,000 in damages and/or injuries.

Understanding Florida Premises Liability Law:

This legal field in Florida holds property owners accountable for injuries sustained by visitors due to hazardous conditions on their property. The type of duty they owe depends on the visitor's status:

Invitee: Someone invited onto the property for the owner's benefit (e.g., customers, delivery personnel). Owners owe the highest duty of care to invitees, requiring them to:
Maintain the property in a reasonably safe condition.
Warn invitees of any hidden dangers they know or should know about.
Take reasonable steps to protect invitees from harm.
Licensee: Someone entering the property with the owner's permission but for their own benefit (e.g., social guests). The owner owes licensees a lower duty of care, meaning they must:
Warn licensees of any hidden dangers they know about.
Avoid willful or wanton conduct that causes harm.
Trespasser: Someone entering the property without the owner's permission. The owner has the least duty of care to trespassers, which means they must:
Avoid using excessive force to remove them.
Not intentionally injure them.

Proving Negligence:

To win a premises liability case in Florida, you must prove:

The owner owed you a duty of care.
The owner breached that duty by failing to maintain the property in a reasonably safe condition or by failing to warn of hidden dangers.
The breach of duty caused your injuries.
You suffered damages (e.g., medical bills, lost wages, pain and suffering).

Common examples of premises liability cases in Florida:

Slip and fall accidents due to wet floors, uneven surfaces, or inadequate lighting.
Injuries from falling objects due to faulty maintenance or unsecured structures.
Swimming pool accidents due to lack of fencing, missing safety equipment, or inadequate supervision.
Dog bites caused by an owner's negligence in controlling their pet.
Injuries from criminal activity due to inadequate security measures.

Additional Notes:

Even if you contributed to your injury, Florida's pure comparative negligence law allows you to recover damages, but your award will be reduced by your percentage of fault.
There is a 4-year statute of limitations to file a lawsuit after the incident.
Google Bard

Outcome: On December 6, 2023, Defendant Holiday CVS, LLC, removed this case from state court on the basis of diversity jurisdiction. (Doc. # 1). The complaint does not specify the amount of damages sought, and when "damages are unspecified, the removing party bears the burden of establishing the jurisdictional amount by a preponderance of the evidence." Lowery v. Ala. Power Co., 483 F.3d 1184, 1208 (11th Cir. 2007). Upon review of the notice of removal, the Court determined that "CVS [had] not established that the amount in controversy requirement [had] been met by a preponderance of the evidence." (Doc. # 6). The Court explained: "Here, CVS relies solely on the allegations of the complaint--even though the complaint does not state the amount of damages sought--to establish that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000. The Court is not persuaded by the boilerplate allegations of the complaint that the damages in this slip and fall action exceed $75,000." (Id.). But the Court gave CVS the opportunity "to provide additional information establishing, if possible, that the amount in controversy requirement has been met." (Id.). Now, CVS has filed its supplemental response. (Doc. # 13). But the response provides no substantive information about the amount of damages at issue. Rather, at most, CVS points out that Plaintiff's counsel, in a letter requesting information about Defendants' property liability insurance, stated that Plaintiff "was severely injured" and "requires ongoing medical treatment." (Id. at 4). This vague statement, unaccompanied by any concrete evidence regarding Plaintiff's medical bills or lost wages incurred as a result of her slip and fall, does not establish that the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 by a preponderance of the evidence. In short, CVS has failed to carry its burden to establish the jurisdictional amount by a preponderance of the evidence. Accordingly, this Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over this case. The Clerk is directed to remand this case to state court and, thereafter, close this case. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 12/13/2023. (DMD) (Entered: 12/13/2023)

Plaintiff's Experts:

Defendant's Experts:

Comments: