BETHANY EVANGELICAL COVENANT CHURCH OF MIAMI, FLORIDA, INC., ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
DONNA J. CALANDRA, ETC., 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 Third District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's decision to sever claims against a regional and national church from claims against a local church in a case involving allegations of inappropriate contact by a teacher. The court held that because all claims arose from a single injury and involved intertwined facts and legal issues, they should be tried together to avoid inconsistent verdicts.
The trial court abused its discretion in severing the claims. Because all claims arose from a single injury and the facts and legal issues were inextricably interwoven, the claims should have been tried together in a single proceeding to avoid the increased possibility of inconsistent verdicts.
[1] A trial court abuses its discretion by severing claims that arise from a single injury and are inextricably interwoven.
[2] Where the facts and issues underlying multiple claims are intertwined, a single trial is generally appropriate.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Where the facts and issues underlying the claims are intertwined, the trial court should conduct a single trial.”
Establishes the legal standard for when severance is inappropriate and claims should be tried together.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDonna Calandra filed suit on behalf of herself and her minor child against a teacher at a local church school, his supervisor, and the local church, a…
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 Intertwined Claims cases and more on FLexlaw
GERSTEN, C.J.
Bethany Evangelical Covenant Church of Miami, Florida (“local church”), the Southeast Conference of the Evangelical Covenant Church of America, Inc., (“regional church”), and Evangelical Covenant Church, Inc., (“national church”) (or collectively “church entities”) seek certiorari review of an order severing claims based on respondeat superior and negligent hiring and retention. We grant the petition and reverse.
Donna Calandra (“Calandra”) filed suit, on behalf of herself and her minor child, against a teacher, his supervisor and the local church. She alleged that the teacher of the local church school engaged in inappropriate and offensive contact with the minor child. The claims against the local church were based on respondeat superior and negligent hiring and retention.
Calandra subsequently amended her complaint to add similar claims against the regional church and the national church. Based on Calandra’s motion, the trial court severed the claims against the regional church and the national church from the claims against the local church and the other defendants.
The church entities assert that the trial court abused its discretion in severing the claims because they arise from a single injury and are inextricably interwoven. Calandra contends the claims against the regional church and the national church are separate and distinct from the claims against the local church and the other defendants. Thus, Calandra contends the trial court did not abuse its discretion in severing the claims. We agree with the church entities.
Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.270(b) authorizes a trial court to order separate trials or severance of claims. The decision to sever is normally within the trial court’s discretion. Travelers Express, Inc. v. Acosta, 397 So. 2d 733, 737 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Because of the increased possibility of inconsistent verdicts, however, the trial court should carefully consider ordering separate trials. 397 So. 2d at 737.
Where the facts and issues underlying the claims are intertwined, the trial court should conduct a single trial. See e.g., Rooss v. Mayberry, 866 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Maris Distrib. Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 710 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). Here, the claims all arise from allegations of a single injury and it makes sense to try them together. As the Honorable Justice William Orville Douglas once said, “common sense often makes good law.” Peak v. U.S., 353 U.S. 43, 46, 77 S.Ct. 613, 1 L.Ed.2d 631 (1957).
Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari, quash the order granting severance, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Petition granted, order quashed, and cause remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dimitrios Georgos Kavouras v. Mario City Rest. Corp., 88 So. 3d 213 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)…which involve interrelated factual issues because severance risks inconsistent outcomes. ACT Servs., Inc. v. Sch. Bd. of Miami-Dade Cnty., 29 So. 3d 450, 453 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); Bethany Evangelical Covenant Church of Miami, Fla., Inc. v. Ca-landra, 994 So. 2d 478, 479 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008). Moreover, it is well settled that where mixed equitable and legal claims are presented on interrelated facts, the trial court first must have a jury decide the case so as to preserve the parties’ right to a jury trial. See,…
-
Choi v. Auto-Owners Ins. Co. & Haley P. Beutler, 224 So. 3d 882 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)…interwoven based on the risk of inconsistent verdicts. See Rocket Grp., LLC v. Jatib, 174 So. 3d 576, 576 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015); Minty, 97 So. 3d at 931; Kavouras, 88 So. 3d at 214; Bethany Evangelical Covenant Church of Miami, Fla., Inc. v. Calandra, 994 So. 2d 478, 479 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Maris Distrib. Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 710 So. 2d 1022, 1024 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). Thus, to the extent the trial court relied on rule 1.270(b) to support its decision, it was a departure from the essential requirements o…
-
ACT Servs., Inc. v. Sch. Bd. OF Miami-Dade Cnty., 29 So. 3d 450 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)…ntertwined. Allowing the contractor’s witnesses (in the trial of the claims against the surety) to “participate in the trial to present defenses” is tantamount to a combined trial rather than a severance.1 In Bethany Evangelical Church v. Calandra, 994 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008), we granted a petition for certiorari for similar reasons. In that case, a parent sued a church school teacher, the local church itself, a regional church organization, and the national church organization. The parent moved for se…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Peak v. United States, 353 U.S. 43 (U.S. 1957)
- Travelers Express, Inc. v. Myriam Acosta, 397 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Maris Distrib. Co. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 710 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Rooss v. Kurt R. Mayberry, M.D., 866 So. 2d 174 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)