MADELINE K. GROSS AND CHARLES H. MONAST, CO-PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ESTATE OF RAYMOND E. GROSS, DECEASED, AND MADELINE K. GROSS, INDIVIDUALLY, PETITIONERS,
v.
SECURITY TRUST COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, N/K/A NORTHERN TRUST BANK OF FLORIDA, N.A., ARCHBISHOP CARROLL CATHOLIC LIFE CENTER TRUST, HOLY CROSS HOSPITAL, A FLORIDA NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION, WILSON PETROLEUM CORPORATION, ENERGY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND FAITH M. WILLIAMSON, 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 court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in limiting discovery, and thus certiorari should be denied.
The petitioner sought a writ of certiorari to review an order limiting discovery. The petitioner argued that the trial court abused its discretion in …
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 Spousal Privilege cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Whether depositions, or any other discovery, should be limited is within the broad discretion of the trial court. Orlowitz v. Orlowitz, 199 So. 2d 97 (Fla.1967); Continental Mortgage Investors v. Village By The Sea, 252 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971).
Communications between spouses are privileged only if intended to be made in confidence. § 90.504(1), Fla.Stat. (1983); Hughs’ Florida Evidence Manual, § 136; See also 24 Fla.Jur.2d, Evidence and Witnesses, § 529.
A protective order under Rule 1.280(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure is available only upon a showing of good cause. Orlando Sports Stadium v. Sentinel Star Co., 316 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975).
Certiorari will not be granted “except in those cases where an abuse of discretion has been shown so as to constitute a departure from the essential requirements of law which cannot be remedied on appeal.” Burroughs Corporation v. White Lumber Sales, 372 So. 2d 122 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979).
CERTIORARI DENIED.
LETTS, HERSEY and GLIC^STEIN, JJ., concur. I
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
SCI Funeral Servs. OF Fla., Inc. v. Light, 811 So. 2d 796 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…d). Similarly, Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(c) provides for the issuance of protective orders upon good cause shown. Thus, the scope and limitation of discovery is within the broad discretion of the trial court. See Gross v. Sec. Trust Co., 453 So. 2d 944, 945 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). No abuse of that discretion resulting in a departure from the essential requirements of law has been shown. The trial court considered the issues and the affidavits. Those affidavits attested to the significant publicity a…
-
Smith v. S. Baptist Hosp. OF Fla., Inc., 564 So. 2d 1115 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
-
Yokie v. State, 773 So. 2d 115 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…ns between husband wife, the communication is protected only if the spouse intended it to be private. Proffitt v. State, 315 So. 2d 461, 464 (Fla.1975), aff'd, 428 U.S. 242, 96 S.Ct. 2960, 49 L.Ed.2d 913 (1976); see also Gross v. Security Trust Co., 453 So. 2d 944, 945 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). Marital communications are presumed confidential absent evidence to the contrary. Hanger Orthopedic Group, Inc. v. McMurray, 181 F.R.D. 525, 530 (M.D.Fla.1998). Factors, such as the nature of the message and circumstances…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Orlando Sports Stadium, Inc. v. Sentinel Star Co., 316 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)
- Orlowitz v. Ellis K. Orlowitz, 199 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 1967)
- Burroughs Corp. v. White Lumber Sales, Inc., 372 So. 2d 122 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)
- Cont'l Mortg. Invs. v. Vill. BY THE SEA, Inc., 252 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)