Legal Opinion

Dodson v. Persell

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 5, 1978No. 78-449PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

The controlling question on this appeal is whether the plaintiffs in a personal injury action were entitled to the discovery of surveillance films under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280. The plaintiffs rely for reversal upon Corack v. Travelers Insurance Company, 347 So.2d 641 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); and Spencer v. Beverly, 307 So.2d 461 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975).

This court has held that surveillance films may constitute work product and may be excluded from discovery on that basis. See Collier v. McKesson, 121 So.2d 673 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960). We hold that the refusal of the trial court to require…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Surf Drugs, Inc. v. VermetteSupreme Court of Florida · 1970
  2. Seaboard Air Line R. Co. v. TimmonsSupreme Court of Florida · 1952
  3. Adelhelm v. DoughertySupreme Court of Florida · 1937
  4. McKinney Supply Company v. OrovitzSupreme Court of Florida · 1957
  5. Spencer v. BeverlyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1975

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Dodson v. PersellSupreme Court of Florida · 1980
  2. Target Corp. v. VogelDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2010
  3. Dodson v. PersellDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API