motion to dismiss wrong first plaintiff florida

MOTION TO DISMISS WRONG FIRST PLAINTIFF FLORIDA HOW TO
MOTION TO DISMISS WRONG FIRST PLAINTIFF FLORIDA TRIAL

6Ĭertainly, despite the apparent stringency of this standard, there are numerous examples of Florida courts finding a personal injury plaintiff’s fraudulent conduct during discovery sufficiently egregious to dismiss the entire action. Because dismissal is the most severe of all possible sanctions, however, it should be employed only in extreme circumstances.

MOTION TO DISMISS WRONG FIRST PLAINTIFF FLORIDA TRIAL

Because “dismissal sounds the ‘death knell of the lawsuit,’ courts must reserve such strong medicine for instances where the defaulting party’s misconduct is correspondingly egregious.” The trial court has the inherent authority, within the exercise of sound judicial discretion, to dismiss an action when a plaintiff has perpetrated a fraud on the court, or where a party refuses to comply with court orders. The requisite fraud on the court occurs where “it can be demonstrated, clearly and convincingly, that a party has sentiently set in motion some unconscionable scheme calculated to interfere with the judicial system’s ability impartially to adjudicate a matter by improperly influencing the trier of fact or unfairly hampering the presentation of the opposing party’s claim or defense.” When reviewing a case for fraud, the court should “consider the proper mix of factors” and carefully balance a policy favoring adjudication on the merits with competing policies to maintain the integrity of the judicial system. The Fifth District explained that courts must weigh the policy condemning fraudulent claims with the competing policy favoring adjudication of a plaintiff’s claim on its merits: 5 In Cox, the Fifth District sought to strike an appropriate balance. Burke was among the first in Florida to set forth a standard to assist parties and courts in determining when a plaintiff’s fraud is sufficiently pervasive to warrant dismissal of the entire claim.

In Florida’s “fraud upon the court” jurisprudence, the Fifth District Court of Appeal’s decision in Cox v.

Because Florida’s Constitution guarantees access to courts, 4 Florida courts grapple with whether dismissing all or part of a claim for fraud is an overly harsh remedy. 2 The basis for keeping clearly fraudulent claims entirely out of court is that “a party who has been guilty of fraud or misconduct in the prosecution or defense of a civil proceeding should not be permitted to continue to employ the very institution it has subverted.” 3 That said, while the tools for dismissal are readily available in the law, proving that dismissal is the appropriate sanction in any particular case is not a simple undertaking. Florida law provides that when a plaintiff lies to the court on matters central to the claim, which impede the ability to defend or undermine the truth-seeking function of the court, dismissal of the claim may be appropriate.

Occasionally, the fraudulent nature of a personal injury claim does not become apparent until the matter is in litigation - when defense counsel can begin to investigate and evaluate the nature of a plaintiff’s claim through the discovery process. This article provides a general overview of the standards and criteria that Florida courts apply when determining whether dismissal of an entire personal injury claim is an appropriate sanction in cases in where plaintiffs have made fraudulent representations. 1 Florida courts can impose harsh sanctions against those who abuse the system through fraudulent activities, such as financial sanctions, partial dismissals, and even dismissal of an entire claim however, the burden of proving fraud and the reality of obtaining sanctions can make for a difficult argument.

MOTION TO DISMISS WRONG FIRST PLAINTIFF FLORIDA HOW TO

Insurance carriers employ a number of tools to combat the prevalence of insurance fraud in personal injury claims, including education to adjusters regarding how to identify and respond to fraud, industrywide seminars from law firms and insurance organizations, and dedicated special investigative units (“SIU”) to probe the existence of fraud, which can support prosecution where the fraud amounts to a crime. Has Plaintiff Set in Motion an Unconscionable Scheme Calculated To Interfere With the Administration of Justice

Motion to dismiss wrong first plaintiff florida