Rodriguez v. Scurtis
The Third District granted certiorari and quashed an order permitting plaintiffs to amend their complaint to add a punitive damages claim under section 768.72. The trial court's order recited the narrow appellate certiorari standard (limited to whether the procedural requirements of section 768.72 were met) rather than performing the trial court's own first-instance evaluation of the proffered evidentiary basis, which was a departure from the essential requirements of law.
Key facts
- Plaintiffs sought to amend their complaint to add a punitive damages claim under section 768.72.
- The trial court granted the motion to amend but issued an order reciting the appellate certiorari standard rather than conducting its own first-instance evaluation of the evidentiary basis for punitive damages.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
Practitioners defending against punitive damages amendments should scrutinize the language of the trial court's order: reciting the appellate certiorari standard is itself a procedural error that opens the door to… — 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.