ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY
v.
BRENT M. HUBER, INC., MCDONALD AND COMPANY INSURANCE AGENCY, INC., KEVIN MCDONALD, AND KLLJMAC, LLC
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.
A party seeking a protective order to prohibit an attorney's deposition must assert specific privilege objections rather than make general, blanket claims of privilege.
[1] A party seeking a protective order to prevent deposition of its attorney must make specific objections to particular questions based on applicable privileges rather than…
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“Florida courts have disapproved the entry of protective orders prohibiting the taking of depositions generally.”
The court cited Bush v. Schiavo for the proposition that blanket protective orders against depositions are disfavored.
Allstate sought an emergency motion for a protective order to prevent Brent M. Huber, Inc. from deposing Allstate's Corporate Litigation Counsel. The …
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 Florida Rule Of Civil Procedure 1.280(C) cases and more on FLexlaw
HARRIS, J.
Petitioner, Allstate Insurance Company (“Allstate”), seeks certiorari review of an order denying its emergency motion for protective order as to Respondent, Brent M. Huber’s, attempt to depose Allstate’s Corporate Litigation Counsel. Huber argues that Allstate failed to establish a departure from the essential requirements of the law because the order under review simply permitted the deposition to occur, but did not rule on any attorneyclient privilege objections. We agree.
The rules of civil procedure do not prohibit the deposition of an attorney simply because he or she is an attorney, and protective orders totally prohibiting a deposition should rarely be granted absent extraordinary circumstances. See Bush v. Schiavo, 866 So. 2d 136, 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (“Florida courts have disapproved the entry of protective orders prohibiting the taking of depositions generally.”). In City of Oldsmar v. Kimmins Contracting Corp., 805 So. 2d 1091, 1093 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), the court noted that “Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.310(a) permits the taking of a deposition of ‘any person.’” Courts must “exercise great care before permitting the deposition of an attorney.” Stull v. Suntrust Bank, Case No. 09-82302-CIV-DIMITROULEAS/SELTZER, 2011 WL 13224911, at *2 (S.D. Fla. Jan. 20, 2011) (quoting W. Peninsular Title Co. v. Palm Beach Cnty., 132 F.R.D. 301, 302 (S.D. Fla. 1990)). The mere request for the deposition of a party’s attorney can create good cause for the party opposing the deposition to seek a protective order pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(c). However, when seeking relief, a party cannot make a general, blanket claim of privilege. Payne v. Seminole Elec. Coop., Inc., Case No. 3:19-cv-1173-TJC-MCR, 2021 WL 3017392, at *9 (M.D. Fla. Feb.2, 2021). That is all Allstate has done here.
Accordingly, we deny Allstate’s request that we quash the order denying its motion for protective order. During the deposition, Allstate should be permitted to make objections to
PETITION DENIED.
EDWARDS, C.J., and SOUD, J., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________
3
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Jeb Bush v. Schiavo, 866 So. 2d 136 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Knapp, 234 So. 3d 843 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)