Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 61.58 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
Statute is currently reporting as:
F.S. 61.58 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 61.58

The 2024 Florida Statutes

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Chapter 61
DISSOLUTION OF MARRIAGE; SUPPORT; TIME-SHARING
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 61.58
61.58 Confidentiality of a collaborative law communication.Except as provided in this section, a collaborative law communication is confidential to the extent agreed by the parties in a signed record or as otherwise provided by law.
(1) PRIVILEGE AGAINST DISCLOSURE FOR COLLABORATIVE LAW COMMUNICATION; ADMISSIBILITY; DISCOVERY.
(a) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), a collaborative law communication is privileged as provided under paragraph (b), is not subject to discovery, and is not admissible into evidence.
(b) In a proceeding, the following privileges apply:
1. A party may refuse to disclose, and may prevent another person from disclosing, a collaborative law communication.
2. A nonparty participant may refuse to disclose, and may prevent another person from disclosing, a collaborative law communication of a nonparty participant.
(c) Evidence or information that is otherwise admissible or subject to discovery does not become inadmissible or protected from discovery solely because of its disclosure or use in a collaborative law process.
(2) WAIVER AND PRECLUSION OF PRIVILEGE.
(a) A privilege under subsection (1) may be waived orally or in a record during a proceeding if it is expressly waived by all parties and, in the case of the privilege of a nonparty participant, if it is expressly waived by the nonparty participant.
(b) A person who makes a disclosure or representation about a collaborative law communication that prejudices another person in a proceeding may not assert a privilege under subsection (1). This preclusion applies only to the extent necessary for the person prejudiced to respond to the disclosure or representation.
(3) LIMITS OF PRIVILEGE.
(a) A privilege under subsection (1) does not apply to a collaborative law communication that is:
1. Available to the public under chapter 119 or made during a session of a collaborative law process that is open, or is required by law to be open, to the public;
2. A threat, or statement of a plan, to inflict bodily injury or commit a crime of violence;
3. Intentionally used to plan a crime, commit or attempt to commit a crime, or conceal an ongoing crime or ongoing criminal activity; or
4. In an agreement resulting from the collaborative law process, as evidenced by a record signed by all parties to the agreement.
(b) The privilege under subsection (1) for a collaborative law communication does not apply to the extent that such collaborative law communication is:
1. Sought or offered to prove or disprove a claim or complaint of professional misconduct or malpractice arising from or relating to a collaborative law process; or
2. Sought or offered to prove or disprove abuse, neglect, abandonment, or exploitation of a child or an adult unless the Department of Children and Families is a party to or otherwise participates in the process.
(c) A privilege under subsection (1) does not apply if a tribunal finds, after a hearing in camera, that the party seeking discovery or the proponent of the evidence has shown that the evidence is not otherwise available, the need for the evidence substantially outweighs the interest in protecting confidentiality, and the collaborative law communication is sought or offered in:
1. A proceeding involving a felony; or
2. A proceeding seeking rescission or reformation of a contract arising out of the collaborative law process or in which a defense is asserted to avoid liability on the contract.
(d) If a collaborative law communication is subject to an exception under paragraph (b) or paragraph (c), only the part of the collaborative law communication necessary for the application of the exception may be disclosed or admitted.
(e) Disclosure or admission of evidence excepted from the privilege under paragraph (b) or paragraph (c) does not make the evidence or any other collaborative law communication discoverable or admissible for any other purpose.
(f) The privilege under subsection (1) does not apply if the parties agree in advance in a signed record, or if a record of a proceeding reflects agreement by the parties, that all or part of a collaborative law process is not privileged. This paragraph does not apply to a collaborative law communication made by a person who did not receive actual notice of the collaborative law participation agreement before the communication was made.
History.s. 7, ch. 2016-93.

F.S. 61.58 on Google Scholar

F.S. 61.58 on Casetext

Amendments to 61.58


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 61.58
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 61.58.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 61.58

Total Results: 6

CG Tides LLC v. SHEDDF3 VNB, LLC

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 2024-05-08T00:00:00-07:00

Snippet: February 2, 2021, resulting in a new amount owed of $61,058,454. The Note Holder’s payoff letter thereby effectively

In Re: Amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure - Forms 12.985 (a)-(g) (Collaborative Law Process)

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 2020-11-11T23:53:00-08:00

Snippet: The Parties understand that, pursuant to Section 61.58, Florida Statutes, this Notice shall operate as …hereby provides notice in accordance with Section 61.58, Florida Statutes, that the parties’ Collaborative

In Re: Amendments to the Florida Family Law Rules of Procedure - Forms 12.985 (a)-(g) (Collaborative Law Process)

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 2020-10-15T00:53:00-07:00

Snippet: The Parties understand that, pursuant to Section 61.58, Florida Statutes, this Notice shall operate as …hereby provides notice in accordance with Section 61.58, Florida Statutes, that the parties’ Collaborative

McNayr v. Kelly

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1966-03-22T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 184 So. 2d 428

Snippet: Review 875 (1956); 74 Harvard Law Review 44 (1960-61); 58 Michigan Law Review 295-297 (1959-60); 38 Texas

NATIONAL MUTUAL INS. CO. OF DIST. OF COL. v. Dotschay

Court: Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | Date Filed: 1961-11-08T23:53:00-08:00

Citation: 134 So. 2d 248

Snippet: COLUMBIA, Appellant, v. Nick DOTSCHAY, Appellee. Nos. 61-58, 61-59. District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third…summary judgments in favor of the appellant. 61-58, 61-59 District Court of Appeal of Florida fladistctapp

Fine v. Moran

Court: Fla. | Date Filed: 1917-12-06T00:00:00-08:00

Citation: 74 Fla. 417

Snippet: intoxicating beverages. See State v. O’Connell, 99 Me. 61, 58 Atl. Rep. 59. “It is a recognized rule in the interpretation