[CLC-Discussion] MTC 558.004(15) document request denied

[RPPTL CLC-Discussion]

I know the statute isn't specifically worded this way, but I generally have felt that the way to get this sanction is to make the request pursuant to 558.004. Get some documents (or none). Then in litigation, make a regular discovery request. Get more documents. Seek sanctions for the other party failing to produce documents that existed when the 558.004 notice was given. To me, that's in keeping with the alleged purpose behind the statute of keeping disputes from getting to litigation. If you fail to provide a certain class of documents upfront, and later it becomes clear you had them but just didn't provide them, then you get sanctioned for it.

[Dinsmore]
Jason S. Lambert
Partner

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP  *  Legal Counsel
Tampa City Center
201 North Franklin Street
Suite 3050
Tampa, FL 33602
T (813) 543-9823  *  F (813) 543-9849
E jason.lambert at dinsmore.com<mailto:jason.lambert at dinsmore.com>  *  dinsmore.com<http://www.dinsmore.com>
From: clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org <clc-discussion-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org> On Behalf Of RPPTL CLC-Discussion
Sent: Monday, October 19, 2020 12:12 PM
To: clc-discussion at lists.flabarrpptl.org
Subject: [CLC-Discussion] MTC 558.004(15) document request denied

Good morning all,
We are representing a homeowner in a defect case. I just received an unexpected result on a Motion to Compel Documents requested under Section 558.004(15), Florida Statutes and for the cost of the motion..

At hearing there was no argument that the contractor was in violation of the section. The judge read to him the part of the motion that said :
"Section 558.004 provides that "any party who failed to provide the requested materials shall be subject to such sanctions as the court may impose for a discovery violation." Fla. Stat. § 558.004(15)."

He asked him why he shouldn't award sanctions. Opposing counsel agreed that was the law but argued that now that litigation had begun the request should have been re-submitted under the rules of civil procedure.  I argued against that obviously because the wording and the intent of the statute are clear and the contractor had admitted non-compliance. ,  The judge reserved ruling and came back with a denial with the order stating :  "The Plaintiff may seek discovery using the Rules of Civil Procedure. "

This was in Orange County. Any thoughts?

Thank you,
Jack
Jack Taylor, Esq.
Associate Attorney



Williams Law Firm
212 W. Bay Ave
Longwood, FL 32750
Telephone: 407-926-4100

Jack at WCLfirm.com<mailto:gtwlaw at ymail.com>
www.WCLFirm.com<http://www.wclfirm.com/>

[cid:image003.jpg at 01D6A791.37D99070]



In some circumstances this firm may be deemed a "debt collector" as defined by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and other applicable law. In such a case, this is an attempt to collect a debt. Any communication obtained may be used for that purpose.


Important - Williams Law Firm utilizes spam and junk email filtration applications in its email information systems. These systems may prevent or delay delivery of certain email communications. If you do not receive a response to an email communication within two business days, please contact the intended recipient via phone.
This email message including attachments, if any, is intended for the use of the individual or entity named above and may contain attorney-client confidential and/or privileged information.  If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, use, disclosure, copying, or distribution is strictly prohibited.  If you have received this email message in error, please contact the sender by reply email and destroy all copies of the original message including attachments.  Thank you.
Pursuant to federal regulations imposed on practitioners who render tax advice ("Circular 230"), we are required to advise you that any tax advice contained herein is not intended or written to be used for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed by the Internal Revenue Service.  If this advice is or is intended to be used or referred to in promoting, marketing or recommending a partnership or other entity, investment plan or arrangement, the regulations under Circular 230 require that we advise you as follows: (1) this writing is not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on a taxpayer; (2) the advice was written to support the promotion or marketing of the transaction(s) or matter(s) addressed by the written advice; and (3) the taxpayer should seek advice based on the taxpayer's particular circumstances from an independent tax advisor.







________________________________

NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission from the law firm of Dinsmore & Shohl may constitute an attorney-client communication that is privileged at law. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying it, and notify the sender by reply e-mail, so that our address record can be corrected.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201021/7ce65f16/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 2865 bytes
Desc: image003.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201021/7ce65f16/image003-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 15708 bytes
Desc: image001.jpg
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/clc-discussion/attachments/20201021/7ce65f16/image001-0001.jpg>