No Common Law First-Party Bad Faith Action in Florida

In QBE Insurance Corporation v. Chalfonte Condominium Apartment Association, Inc., Case No.
SC09-441 (May 31, 2012), the Florida Supreme Court issued an opinion last week in a Hurricane
Wilma property insurance case, which originated in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida. The District Court dismissed the condominium association’s causes of action for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and violation of the font-type
requirements set forth in Florida Statutes § 627.701(4)(a). Both the carrier and the condominium association appealed the ruling to the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

Click here to see the full overview, provided by Wilson Elser.

Florida Courts Require Email Service

On June 21, 2012, the Supreme Court of Florida issued a corrected opinion adopting the new
Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516 (Service of Pleadings and Documents) and amending all corresponding rules of Judicial Administration, Civil Procedure, Criminal Procedure, Probate, Traffic Court, Small Claims, Juvenile Procedure, Appellate Procedure and Family Law to reflect this new rule. The new rule provides mandatory email service of all pleadings and documents, and will apply to all Florida cases.

Effective dates are as follows:

• On September 1, 2012, the rule will be mandatory for attorneys practicing in the civil, probate, small claims and family law divisions of the trial courts and appellate cases.
• On October 1, 2013, attorneys practicing in the criminal, traffic and juvenile divisions of the trial court will have to give service by email in accordance with the rule.

Click here to see the full overview, provided by Wilson Elser.

Failure to Issue a Written Litigation Hold Not Always Fatal

On July 10, 2012, the Second Circuit rejected the Southern District of New York’s January 2010
holding in Pension Committee v. Banc of America that the failure to issue a written litigation hold
is gross negligence, per se, and may give rise to an adverse inference. It held instead, in Chin v.
Port Authority of New York and New Jersey , that the better approach is to consider the failure to
adopt good preservation practices as one factor in the determination of whether discovery sanctions should issue.

Although this holding is a welcome relief to litigants who for whatever reason did not issue a timely, comprehensive, written litigation hold, there remains no doubt that the best practice is still to issue such a hold as soon as a preservation obligation is triggered, and then to monitor, enforce and amend the hold as necessary.

Click here to see the full overview, provided by Wilson Elser.