← Case library
3rd DCAOctober 16, 2019Affirmed⭐ Notable

Araujo v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc.

Case No. 18-0204

In a slip-and-fall case where the jury found the plaintiff 50% comparatively negligent and awarded $231,435.13, the Third DCA affirmed the final judgment and the denial of the plaintiff's rule 1.380(c) attorney's fee motion. The court held that Worley does not bar defense cross-examination of a non-party treating physician about the percentage of his practice and income derived from referrals by the plaintiff's law firm, that spoliation jury instructions (Std. Instr. 301.11(a)-(b)) were properly refused absent any duty to preserve additional video or any showing of intentional destruction, and that fees under rule 1.380(c) are unavailable where the denied admissions concerned hotly contested central issues.

Key facts

  • Plaintiff sued Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. for injuries sustained in a slip-and-fall incident at a Winn-Dixie store.
  • At trial, the jury found plaintiff 50% comparatively negligent and awarded $231,435.13 in damages.
  • +2 more key facts with a free trial

Why it matters

The Worley discussion is the headline: defense counsel in personal-injury cases can cite this opinion to establish that financial-bias inquiry directed at a non-party treating physician about law-firm referral income is… — full analysis with a trial

Best value · free

Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days

The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.

  • Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
  • Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
  • Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Start my free 30-day trial → No credit card required
👀 Take a quick tour of the site → 60 seconds · click a real case · no login

Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.

Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.