ERIK SANDERSON, TECHNOMARINE CONSTRUCTION, INC. AND TECHNOMARINE GROUP, INC.
v.
CHRISTOPHER KARCH

Fla. 4th DCA | 2018-11-21
No. 18-1695
Howard, Torruella, Lynch
257 So. 3d 1091 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2018) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.


Holding

A party waives appellate review of trial court errors regarding witness striking and discovery sanctions dismissal when the party fails to raise those issues at the hearing or by timely motion for rehearing or reconsideration.


Headnotes

[1] A party waives appellate review of a trial court's erroneous striking of a witness or dismissal of a complaint as discovery sanctions when the party fails to raise object…

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

Key Quotes

“the court's 'clear errors' in failing to consider relevant factors before striking a witness and failing to consider the Kozel factors before dismissing a complaint as discovery sanctions could not be reviewed on appeal in light of sanctioned party's failure to 'raise either of these issues at the hearing on the motion to dismiss or by subsequently filing a motion for rehearing or reconsideration'”

Court's holding from Bank of Am., N.A. v. Ribaudo regarding waiver of appellate review

Facts & Procedural History

The trial court struck a witness and dismissed a complaint as discovery sanctions in a dispute involving appellants Erik Sanderson, Technomarine Const…

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.


Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Bank of Am., N.A. v. Ribaudo, 199 So. 3d 407, 409 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (holding that the court’s “clear errors” in failing to consider relevant factors before striking a witness and failing to consider the Kozel factors before dismissing a complaint as discovery sanctions could not be reviewed on appeal in light of sanctioned party’s failure to “raise either of these issues at the hearing on the motion to dismiss or by subsequently filing a motion for rehearing or reconsideration”). GROSS, DAMOORGIAN and CIKLIN, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw