Valcin presumption in Florida

2022Unlike a Valcin presumption, an inference generally will not support a jury instruction: It is important to note that an adverse inference from the failure to produce evidence is different than the Valcin [Public Health Trust of Dade County v. Valcin, 507 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 1987)] rebuttable presumption.

2022Unlike a Valcin presumption, an inference generally will not support a jury instruction: It is important to note that an adverse inference from the failure to produce evidence is different than the Valcin [Public Health Trust of Dade County v. Valcin, 507 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 1987)] rebuttable presumption.

2004The jury may accept or reject the inference as it sees fit. 6 Florida Practice, Personal Injury & Wrongful Death Actions § 26.6 (2004 ed.)(footnotes omitted); see Bulkmatic Transport Co. v. Taylor, 860 So.2d 436, 449 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) ( Valcin instruction improper where plaintiff's ability to establish prima facie case is not hindered by the absence of evidence); Jordan ex rel.

2004Shealey, 821 So.2d at 347 (concluding that while "[l]awyers are entitled to argue adverse inferences from the evidence as part of their closing arguments," an adverse inference jury instruction is improper where there was no showing that "the missing evidence [was] essential to the opposing party's prima facie case"); see also Martino v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 835 So.2d 1251, 1256 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (inferences should be limited to the arguments of counsel and not form the basis of instruction to the jury); Fla. Std.

2004Shealey, 821 So.2d at 347 (concluding that while "[l]awyers are entitled to argue adverse inferences from the evidence as part of their closing arguments," an adverse inference jury instruction is improper where there was no showing that "the missing evidence [was] essential to the opposing party's prima facie case"); see also Martino v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 835 So.2d 1251, 1256 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (inferences should be limited to the arguments of counsel and not form the basis of instruction to the jury); Fla. Std.

2003Consultants, P.A. v. Kretzer, 802 So.2d 346, 349 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (holding that the Valcin doctrine is applied when, through the defendant's negligence, essential records are missing or inadequate and such absence or inadequacy hinders the plaintiff's ability to establish a prima facie case).

2003Consultants, P.A. v. Kretzer, 802 So.2d 346, 349 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (holding that the Valcin doctrine is applied when, through the defendant's negligence, essential records are missing or inadequate and such absence or inadequacy hinders the plaintiff's ability to establish a prima facie case).

2001See id. at 599 .

2001See id. at 599 .

2001See Rockwell Int'l Corp. v. Menzies, 561 So.2d 677, 681 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)(The defendant's intentional destruction and loss of two bolts bore on the crucial question of the cause of the plaintiff's injuries and therefore entitled the plaintiff to a Valcin instruction.

2001See Rockwell Int'l Corp. v. Menzies, 561 So.2d 677, 681 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)(The defendant's intentional destruction and loss of two bolts bore on the crucial question of the cause of the plaintiff's injuries and therefore entitled the plaintiff to a Valcin instruction.

2001See Kloster Cruise Ltd. v. Igac, 741 So.2d 1215, 1215 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)(held no abuse of discretion in failing to give a Valcin instruction where there was only one lost MRI film); King, 656 So.2d at 1337 (held an abuse of discretion to give Valcin instruction).

2001See Kloster Cruise Ltd. v. Igac, 741 So.2d 1215, 1215 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)(held no abuse of discretion in failing to give a Valcin instruction where there was only one lost MRI film); King, 656 So.2d at 1337 (held an abuse of discretion to give Valcin instruction).

2001Co., 656 So.2d 1335, 1337 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), disapp'd on other grounds by Murphy v. Int'l Robotic Sys., Inc., 766 So.2d 1010 , 1029 n. 21 (Fla.2000). [3] In the present case, appellant contends that the trial court improperly applied the Valcin presumption because the only records allegedly missing related to a time period after the injury allegedly occurred.

2001Co., 656 So.2d 1335, 1337 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), disapp'd on other grounds by Murphy v. Int'l Robotic Sys., Inc., 766 So.2d 1010 , 1029 n. 21 (Fla.2000). [3] In the present case, appellant contends that the trial court improperly applied the Valcin presumption because the only records allegedly missing related to a time period after the injury allegedly occurred.

2001See King, 656 So.2d at 1337 ; Brown v. Sims, 538 So.2d 901, 908 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)( Valcin instruction was error), quashed in part on other grounds, 574 So.2d 131 (Fla.1991). *351 In Brown , the third district held, under similar facts, that the trial court erred when it used a Valcin presumption to shift the burden of proof to the defendant doctor. 538 So.2d at 908 .

2001See King, 656 So.2d at 1337 ; Brown v. Sims, 538 So.2d 901, 908 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)( Valcin instruction was error), quashed in part on other grounds, 574 So.2d 131 (Fla.1991). *351 In Brown , the third district held, under similar facts, that the trial court erred when it used a Valcin presumption to shift the burden of proof to the defendant doctor. 538 So.2d at 908 .