Breach of a "Full Scope Contingency Contract"
Carriage Hills Condominium, Inc., v. JBH Roofing
& Construction, Inc., 38 Fl. L. Weekly D643a, Case No. 4D11-2251,
filed on March 20, 2013. Summary judgment in favor of roofing contractor for
breach of a "full scope contingency contract" (in which payments were
to be approved and paid by insurer), based soled on the deposition of the
defendant's corporate representative, was reversed due to the improper use of
Rule 1.310(b)(6) regarding notice of deposing a corporation representative, and
the trial court's improper striking of opposing affidavits as contradicting
that deposition. This opinion details the correct use of the rule, and the
strict adherence required to bind the corporate entity. In this case, the
notice of deposition was not compliant with the rule because it failed to cite
to the rule and required production of "the person with the most
knowledge," while failing to specify the issues to be addressed rather
than the "over broad" reference to the general allegation pled; in
addition, the deposition was not properly conducted due to the corporate
representative's statements of personal beliefs and opinions that exceeded the
scope of the deposition notice.
NOTE: This case also set forth four (4) criteria a trial
court must find before striking testimony on the basis that it repudiates or
contradicts that that given by a corporate representative pursuant to this
rule.
(RPPTL Subcomittee)
Trenton H. Cotney
Florida Bar Certified Construction Lawyer
Trent Cotney, P.A.
1211 N Franklin St
Tampa, FL 33602
Comments
Post a Comment