Wheaton v. Wheaton
Resolving an express and direct conflict among the First, Second, Third, and Fourth Districts, the Florida Supreme Court held that proposals for settlement served under section 768.79 and rule 1.442 need not comply with the e-mail service requirements and formatting provisions of Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516, because a proposal is neither a pleading subsequent to the initial pleading nor a document filed in a court proceeding. The Court quashed the Third District's contrary decision and approved Boatright, McCoy, and Oldcastle. It also held alternatively that, under Kuhajda, non-compliance with rule 2.516's formatting requirements would not invalidate a proposal that satisfied the substantive requirements of section 768.79 and rule 1.442.
Key facts
- Parties disputed whether a proposal for settlement served under Florida Statute section 768.79 and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442 must comply with the e-mail service and formatting requirements of Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516.
- The trial court and lower appellate courts were split across four districts on whether non-compliance with rule 2.516's e-mail formatting requirements invalidated otherwise-valid settlement proposals.
- +1 more key fact with a free trial
Why it matters
This is a definitive statewide resolution of a four-district conflict that had been invalidating otherwise-valid proposals for settlement — and thus fee entitlement — on purely technical e-mail formatting grounds… — 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.