Legal Opinion · Dissent

Millard Mall Services, Inc. v. Bolda

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 11, 2015No. 4D14-1338Published

1DissentWarner, J.

I disagree with the majority opinion that the Quarterly Safety Reports were protected work product. These reports were used to promote safety and to determine whether proper maintenance was being done at the mall. The reports, as opposed to individual incident reports, were not made in anticipation of litigation: See, e.g., Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Bennett, 883 So.2d 373, 374 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (documents are not work product unless they are prepared when the probability of litigation is “substantial and imminent”), quashed on other grounds by Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. Bennett, 905…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Allstate Indem. Co. v. RuizSupreme Court of Florida · 2005
  2. Cotton States Mut. Ins. Co. v. Turtle Reef Associates, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984
  3. Allstate Indem. Co. v. RuizDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001
  4. Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. AndersonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012
  5. Liberty Mut. Fire Ins. Co. v. BennettSupreme Court of Florida · 2005

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

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

Powered by the Exa API