ROBERT C. MALT, INDIVIDUALLY, VERA HEFLIN, INDIVIDUALLY, ROBERT C. MALT AND COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND RELIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, PETITIONERS,
v.
VICKI SIMMONS, INDIVIDUALLY, AND RENE SIMMONS, BY AND THROUGH HER MOTHER AND BEST FRIEND, VICKI SIMMONS, RESPONDENTS; ROBERT C. MALT, INDIVIDUALLY AND VERA HEFLIN, PETITIONERS, V. VICKI SIMMONS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Fourth District Court of Appeal reviewed a trial court's denial of a protective order against certain interrogatories in a dispute involving collection practices and emotional distress claims. The court granted the petition for writ of certiorari, finding the interrogatories irrelevant and potentially damaging, and ordered them struck from the record.
The court held that the interrogatories were not relevant to the subject matter of the litigation and were not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The information sought was determined to be confidential in nature and its production might result in irreparable damage. Accordingly, the trial court's order denying the protective order was reversed.
[1] Certiorari is an appropriate vehicle for testing the correctness of an order governing discovery procedures.
[2] Certiorari will be granted only where the order of the trial court is a departure from the essential requirements of law and there would be no adequate remedy by appeal.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“If the interrogatories at issue are relevant to the subject matter involved in the litigation, or if the information sought "appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence," Rule 1.280(b)(1), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, then the questions are appropriate and the order is obviously not a departure from the essential requirements of law.”
Establishes the legal standard for determining whether interrogatories are appropriate and whether denial of a protective order is a departure from law.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRespondents filed a complaint against petitioners for violations of state and federal collection laws and intentional infliction of emotional distress…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Reasonably Calculated To Lead To Admissible Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
By petition for writ of certiorari we are asked to review an order of the trial court denying a motion for a protective order as to certain interrogatories propounded by plaintiff/respondents to defendants/petitioners. Certiorari is an appropriate vehicle for testing the correctness of an order governing discovery procedures. Everglades Protective Syndicate v. Makinney, 391 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). However, certiorari will be granted only where the order of the trial court is a departure from the essential requirements of law and there would be no adequate remedy by appeal. Everglades Protective Syndicate v. Makinney, supra.
If the interrogatories at issue are relevant to the subject matter involved in the litigation, or if the information sought “appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence,” Rule 1.280(b)(1), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, then the questions are appropriate and the order is obviously not a departure from the essential requirements of law. On the other hand, if the interrogatories do not meet this test, not only would the order be a departure from the essential requirements of law, but there would be no adequate remedy on appeal since the information would necessarily have been revealed by the time the case is appealed.
In the instant lawsuit, respondents filed a complaint against petitioners for violation of state and federal collection laws and intentional infliction of emotional distress in seeking to collect unpaid rent for a townhouse managed by petitioners.
We fail to see how the interrogatories are relevant to the subject matter of the litigation or are reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. We have further determined that the information sought is of a confidential nature and that its production might result in damage that would be irreparable. Accordingly, we grant the writ, quash the trial court’s order and direct the trial court to strike the objectionable interrogatories and to expunge them from the record.
MOORE and HERSEY, JJ., concur. ANSTEAD, J., dissents without opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Varsenig Nakutis, 435 So. 2d 307 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)…DAUKSCH, Judge. This is before us on a petition for Writ of Certiorari to the circuit court invoking our jurisdiction to quash a discovery order. Malt v. Simmons, 405 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Powell v. Wingard, 402 So. 2d 532 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). We grant the writ and quash the order. This is a slip and fall case and the plaintiff (respondent here) sought discovery of all internally produced accident reports relatin…
-
Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. U.S.C.P. Co., 515 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…ctness of an order governing discovery. Greyhound Lines, Inc. v. Jackson, 445 So. 2d 1107, 1108 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Gadsden County Times, Inc. v. Home, 426 So. 2d 1234, 1236 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 441 So. 2d 631 (Fla.1983); Malt v. Simmons, 405 So. 2d 1018, 1018-19 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). While certiorari may be used to obtain review of discovery orders, with the exception of the decision in Allstate Insurance Company v. Gibbs, 340 So. 2d 1202 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), cert, dismissed, 354 So. 2d 980 (Fla.197…
-
Gadsden Cnty. Times, Inc. v. Mallory E. Horne, 426 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…eedings for which the remedy by appeal will be inadequate. Id. at 348 (citations omitted). It has also been stated that certiorari is the “appropriate vehicle for testing the correctness of an order governing discovery procedures.” Malt v. Simmons, 405 So. 2d 1018, 1018-1019 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981). Accord, Manatee County v. Estech General Chemicals Corp., 402 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); Affiliated of Florida, Inc. v. U-Need Sundries, Inc., 397 So. 2d 764 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); Everglades Protective Syndicate, Inc…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- The Everglades Protective Syndicate, Inc. v. Makinney, 391 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)