W. GARNETT WHITE AND PAULETTE C. WHITE, APPELLANTS,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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 reversed the judgment because the trial court erred in allowing the Department of Transportation to cross-examine the plaintiff by having him publish portions of an expert appraisal report he had hired but elected not to call, which violated the rule against inferring that a party who hired but failed to call an expert was concealing unfavorable evidence.
A party who hires an expert but elects not to call that expert as a witness cannot be cross-examined by publishing portions of the expert's report to the jury, as this violates the rule against inferring the party is concealing unfavorable evidence.
[1] A party who hires an expert witness but elects not to call that expert cannot be cross-examined by publication of the expert's report to the jury, as permitting such cros…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“we expressly disallowed any inference that the party who hired but then failed to call the expert was covering up harmful evidence or concealing bad facts”
The court cited Sun Charm Ranch, Inc. v. City of Orlando to establish the rule against inferring concealment when a party hires but does not call an expert witness.
W. Garnett White, a real estate broker, was involved in a condemnation proceeding with the Department of Transportation. White had hired an MAI apprai…
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 Adverse Inference cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIFFIN, Judge.
We reverse the final judgment because we agree with appellants that it was error for the lower court to permit appellee, Department of Transportation [“DOT”], to “cross-examine” appellant, W. Garnett White [“White”], by having him publish to the jury portions of a report prepared by an appraiser he had hired as a testifying expert but had elected not to call as a witness. Appellant White did not testify he had relied on the report or made use of it in forming his own opinions of the value of his property. Further, this procedure violates the rule set forth in Sun Charm Ranch, Inc. v. City of Orlando, 407 So. 2d 938, 940-41 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).
There, in the context of condemnation, we authorized the landowner’s use of an expert hired by the condemning authority but we expressly disallowed any inference that the party who hired but then failed to call the expert was covering up harmful evidence or concealing bad facts. Id. at 940.
Such an inference is unmistakable here.
We find no merit in DOT’s argument that this was a permissible measure to alleviate DOT’s surprise at appellant’s last minute decision not to call his expert MAI appraiser and instead to rely on appellant’s own testimony as a real estate broker. REVERSED and REMANDED.
COBB and PETERSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- SUN Charm Ranch, Inc. v. The City OF Orlando, 407 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)