PUBLIX SUPER MARKETS, INC., D/B/A PUBLIX SUPER MARKET, PETITIONER,
v.
SYLVIA JOHN, RESPONDENT

Fla. 4th DCA | 2014-11-19
No. 4D14-1892
STEVENSON, GROSS and GERBER, JJ., concur.
150 So. 3d 1231 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2014) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We grant the petition for writ of certio-rari and quash the April 24, 2014 order granting respondent’s motion to compel production. On remand, the circuit, court shall conduct an in camera review to determine whether the October 11, 2009 incident report is protected by the work product privilege. If the court determines that the document is so protected, it shall not order production unless respondent makes a “showing that [respondent] has need of the materials in the preparation of the case and is unable without undue hardship to obtain the substantial equivalent of the materials by other means.” Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.280(b)(4); see also Publix Super Mkts., Inc. v. Anderson, 92 So.3d 922, 928 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); Lloyd’s Underwriters at London v. El-Ad Villagio Cond. Ass’n, 976 So.2d 28, 28 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).

STEVENSON, GROSS and GERBER, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Fetzner v. State, 219 So. 3d 834 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017)
    …king a record, and showed clear favoritism to the attorneys for the State. We recognize that in other cases we have found this same judge’s treatment of defendants and defense counsel sufficient to warrant disqualification. See Montgomery v. State, 150 So. 3d 1231 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014); Arend v. State, 149 So. 3d 126 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014). We also note there were factual allegations in the defendant’s first motion, and in the record itself, indicating that some of the same conduct warranting disqualification in A…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw