← Case library
3rd DCAMarch 2, 2022Reversed and Remanded⭐ Notable

Hernandez v. CGI Windows and Doors, Inc.

Case No. 20-1318

After a jury verdict for window manufacturer CGI in the homeowners' negligence suit over leaking windows, the Third DCA reversed because the trial court judicially noticed and admitted prior unsworn pleadings (including a third amended complaint naming settled and dismissed co-defendants) and an unadjudicated treble damages motion, which CGI used to argue plaintiffs were 'liars' and 'triple dippers.' The court held unsworn attorney-drafted pleadings are not admissions absent a particularized showing of adoption, and that the evidence yielded the inescapable inference that former defendants had settled, violating section 768.041(3).

Key facts

  • Homeowners Hernandez sued window manufacturer CGI Windows and Doors for negligence based on allegedly defective and leaking windows installed in their home.
  • After a jury verdict in CGI's favor, the trial court had admitted unsworn prior pleadings (including a third amended complaint naming settled and dismissed co-defendants) and an unadjudicated treble damages motion, which CGI used during trial to argue plaintiffs were 'liars' and engaged in 'triple dipping.'
  • +2 more key facts with a free trial

Why it matters

A useful, citable decision for trial lawyers fighting the common defense tactic of using superseded or prior pleadings as party 'admissions' and of exposing settled or dismissed co-defendants to the jury. It combines… — 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.