Federal Insurance Co. v. Perlmutter
On remand from the Florida Supreme Court's decision in Perlmutter II, which clarified the showing required to amend a pleading to assert punitive damages under section 768.72, the Fourth District re-examined orders permitting the Perlmutters to add punitive damages claims against Peerenboom, Douberley, and Federal Insurance. The court affirmed as to Peerenboom but reversed as to Douberley (insufficient pleading and proffer of intentional misconduct) and Federal (vicarious liability failed because of the Douberley reversal and because the proffer showed no 'managing agent' knowingly participated in, condoned, ratified, or consented to the misconduct).
Key facts
- Federal Insurance Co. and individual defendants were sued by the Perlmutters; the trial court granted motions to amend pleadings to add punitive damages claims against three defendants (Peerenboom, Douberley, and Federal Insurance).
- The Fourth District reviewed the amendments on remand from the Florida Supreme Court's Perlmutter II decision, which clarified the standards for amending pleadings to assert punitive damages under section 768.72.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This is the Fourth District's application of the Florida Supreme Court's new Perlmutter II framework for punitive damages amendments — the first substantial roadmap for how courts will apply the clarified section 768.72… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
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.