MEDERI CARETENDERS VISITING SERVICES OF SOUTHEAST FLORIDA, LLC, AND ALMOST FAMILY, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
ELIZABETH WHITE, 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 held that referral sources are protectable legitimate business interests under Florida law and that a non-compete covenant protecting them is enforceable.
Appellant, a home health care provider, challenged a summary judgment that denied enforcement of a non-compete covenant and dismissed a tortious inter…
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 Certification Of Conflict cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, a home health care provider, challenges a final summary judgment denying enforcement of a non-compete covenant and dismissing a tortious interference claim on the authority of Florida Hematology & Oncology v. Tummala, 927 So.2d 135 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). Tummala held that referral sources for. patients in the health care industry were not “legitimate business interests” protectable pursuant to section 542.335, Florida Statutes (2004). Appellant also sought to protect referral sources as business interests in this case.
Recently, in Infinity Home Care, LLC v, Amedisys Holding, LLC, 40 Fla. L. Weekly D1929 (Fla. 4th DCA Aug. 19, 2015), we concluded that referral sources are pro-tectable legitimate interests and that an employment contract containing non-compete and non-solicitation provisions was enforceable. On the authority of Infinity Home Care, we reverse the final summary judgment and remand for further proceedings. As we did in Infinity, we certify conflict with Tummala.
Appellant also appealed an order granting attorney’s fees to appellee in case no. 4D14-2460. We consolidate that case with the main appeal for purposes of disposition. Because we are reversing the main appeal, we also reverse the order awarding attorney’s fees, See River Bridge Carp. v. Am. Somax Ventures, 76 So.3d 986, 989 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011); Viets v. Am. Recruiters Enters., Inc., 922 So.2d 1090, 1096 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).
Reversed and remmded for further proceedings; conflict certified.
WARNER, STEVENSON and FORST, JJ., concur. .
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
White v. Mederi Caretenders Visiting Servs. OF Se. Fla., LLC, 226 So. 3d 774 (Fla. 2017)…LEWIS, J. Two cases have been consolidated and are before the Court for review. First, we review the decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Mederi Caretenders Visiting Services of Southeast Florida, LLC v. White, 179 So. 3d 564 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). In White, the district court, [*777] relying on Infinity Home Care, L.L.C. v. Amedisys Holding, LLC, 180 So. 3d 1060 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016), certified that its decision is in direct conflict with the decision of the Fifth District…
-
NEW Dirt, Inc. v. Harrison, 182 So. 3d 773 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)…e that case^ with the' main appeal for purposes of disposition. Because we reverse the main appeal, we also reverse the final judgment awarding attorney’s fees to Harrison. Mederi Caretenders Visiting Servs. of Se. Fla., LLC v. White, No. 4D14-2460, 179 So. 3d 564, 564, 2015 WL 7752751, at *1 (Fla. 4th DCA Dec. 2, 2015); River Bridge Corp. v. Am. Somax Ventures, 76 So. 3d 986, 989 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011); Viets v. Am. Recruiters Enters., Inc., 922 So. 2d 1090, 1096 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Marty v. Bainter, 727 So. 2…
-
Rodolph v. Rodolph (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)…ber of hours reasonably expended). Post-Judgment Orders Turning to the post-judgment orders, because we reverse the Final Judgment, we also reverse the post-judgment orders. See, e.g., Mederi Caretenders Visiting Servs. of Se. Fla., LLC v. White, 179 So. 3d 564, 564 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (“Because we are reversing the main appeal, we also reverse the order awarding attorney’s fees.”); River Bridge Corp. v. Am. Somax Ventures, 76 So. 3d 986, 989 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (where a fee award was based upon the earlie…
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
- Terrie G. Viets v. Am. Recruiters Enters., Inc., 922 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)
- River Bridge Corp. v. Am. Somax Ventures, 76 So. 3d 986 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)
- Fla. Hematology & Oncology v. Rambabu Tummala, M.D., 927 So. 2d 135 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)