Pro Choice Remediation, Inc. v. Old Dominion Insurance Co.
An assignee remediation contractor's suit against a property insurer was dismissed with prejudice for fraud on the court after it double-billed damages in an interrogatory answer that it later corrected. The First DCA reversed, holding that an isolated, corrected misstatement of damages does not clearly and convincingly establish a sentiently set-in-motion scheme to subvert the judicial process, and that dismissal with prejudice was an abuse of discretion. The court also declined to apply the composite 'more stringent abuse of discretion' standard, instead breaking review into fact (competent substantial evidence), law (de novo), and remedy (abuse of discretion).
Key facts
- Pro Choice Remediation, Inc., an assignee remediation contractor, sued Old Dominion Insurance Co., a property insurer, for damages related to remediation work.
- During discovery, Pro Choice submitted an interrogatory answer containing a duplicative damages figure; a corporate representative acknowledged the error and Pro Choice promptly corrected it.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This decision gives defense-side and plaintiff-side litigators a strong First DCA statement that corrected discovery errors—even inflated damages claims—rarely justify dismissal for fraud on the court, and that… — full analysis with a trial
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
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.