Legal Opinion

Florida Power & Light Co. v. Goldberg

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 11, 1999No. Nos. 99-1194, 99-1198Published

1Per curiam

We agree with the petitioners, Florida Power & Light Co. (“FPL”) and David Ward, that the trial court’s order permitting post-trial discovery into matters wholly collateral and irrelevant to the proceedings below departs from the essential requirements of law. See Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.280(b). Because Walter and Rosalie Goldberg, the plaintiffs below, are not prejudiced by FPL’s post-trial actions, see Walgreens, Inc. v. Newcomb, 603 So.2d 5 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), rev. denied, 613 So.2d 7 (Fla.1993), and because the petitioners would be materially injured by such discovery, the order entered below…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Allstate Ins. Co. v. LangstonSupreme Court of Florida · 1995
  2. Walgreens, Inc. v. NewcombDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API