Syfert Injury Law Firm

Your Trusted Partner in Personal Injury & Workers' Compensation

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 768.72 - Full Text and Legal Analysis
Florida Statute 768.72 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
F.S. 768.72 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 768.72

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XLV
TORTS
Chapter 768
NEGLIGENCE
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 768.72
768.72 Pleading in civil actions; claim for punitive damages.—
(1) In any civil action, no claim for punitive damages shall be permitted unless there is a reasonable showing by evidence in the record or proffered by the claimant which would provide a reasonable basis for recovery of such damages. The claimant may move to amend her or his complaint to assert a claim for punitive damages as allowed by the rules of civil procedure. The rules of civil procedure shall be liberally construed so as to allow the claimant discovery of evidence which appears reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence on the issue of punitive damages. No discovery of financial worth shall proceed until after the pleading concerning punitive damages is permitted.
(2) A defendant may be held liable for punitive damages only if the trier of fact, based on clear and convincing evidence, finds that the defendant was personally guilty of intentional misconduct or gross negligence. As used in this section, the term:
(a) “Intentional misconduct” means that the defendant had actual knowledge of the wrongfulness of the conduct and the high probability that injury or damage to the claimant would result and, despite that knowledge, intentionally pursued that course of conduct, resulting in injury or damage.
(b) “Gross negligence” means that the defendant’s conduct was so reckless or wanting in care that it constituted a conscious disregard or indifference to the life, safety, or rights of persons exposed to such conduct.
(3) In the case of an employer, principal, corporation, or other legal entity, punitive damages may be imposed for the conduct of an employee or agent only if the conduct of the employee or agent meets the criteria specified in subsection (2) and:
(a) The employer, principal, corporation, or other legal entity actively and knowingly participated in such conduct;
(b) The officers, directors, or managers of the employer, principal, corporation, or other legal entity knowingly condoned, ratified, or consented to such conduct; or
(c) The employer, principal, corporation, or other legal entity engaged in conduct that constituted gross negligence and that contributed to the loss, damages, or injury suffered by the claimant.
(4) The provisions of this section shall be applied to all causes of action arising after the effective date of this act.
History.—s. 51, ch. 86-160; s. 1172, ch. 97-102; s. 22, ch. 99-225.

F.S. 768.72 on Google Scholar

F.S. 768.72 on CourtListener

Amendments to 768.72


Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 768.72

Total Results: 355

Cheryl Cohen, on Behalf of Herself and Others Similarly Situated v. Office Depot, Inc., a Florida Corporation

204 F.3d 1069, 46 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 73, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 2789, 2000 WL 217490

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 24, 2000 | Docket: 2027931

Cited 304 times | Published

opinion in this case, we held that Florida Statute § 768.72 conflicts with and must yield to the “short and

Smith v. Gte Corporation, Gte

236 F.3d 1292

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jan 16, 2001 | Docket: 579866

Cited 281 times | Published

not been properly pled in accordance with Fla. Stat. 768.72, the court concluded that the plaintiff's

Smith v. Gte Corporation, Gte

236 F.3d 1292

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jan 16, 2001 | Docket: 579866

Cited 281 times | Published

not been properly pled in accordance with Fla. Stat. 768.72, the court concluded that the plaintiff's

Globe Newspaper Co. v. King

658 So. 2d 518, 20 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 317, 1995 Fla. LEXIS 1127, 1995 WL 392709

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 6, 1995 | Docket: 439616

Cited 131 times | Published

complaint to include punitive damages under section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1993). We conclude that

Williams v. Oken

62 So. 3d 1129, 36 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 202, 2011 Fla. LEXIS 1027, 2011 WL 1675242

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 5, 2011 | Docket: 2360888

Cited 130 times | Published

conducted the evidentiary inquiry required by section 768.72, Florida Statutes, but not so broad as to encompass

Board of Trustees v. American Educational Enterprises, LLC

99 So. 3d 450, 37 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. S 589, 2012 WL 4449131, 2012 Fla. LEXIS 1859

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Sep 27, 2012 | Docket: 60313012

Cited 101 times | Published

1987), superceded by statute on other grounds, § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1989). ANALYSIS When determining

Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Dolgencorp, LLC

746 F.3d 1008

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Mar 5, 2014 | Docket: 141594

Cited 92 times | Published

intentional misconduct or gross negligence.” Fla. Stat. § 768.72(2). “ ‘Intentional misconduct’ means that the

In Re Sahlen & Associates, Inc. Securities Litigation

773 F. Supp. 342, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10920, 1991 WL 152814

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 10, 1991 | Docket: 1229145

Cited 63 times | Published

Plaintiffs have not complied with Florida Statute § 768.72, which requires there to be evidence in the record

AmeriFirst Bank v. Bomar

757 F. Supp. 1365, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1752, 1991 WL 16681

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jan 17, 1991 | Docket: 224995

Cited 59 times | Published

not adequately pled punitive damages pursuant to § 768.72 of the Florida Statutes as AmeriFirst has not

Myers v. CENTRAL FLORIDA INVESTMENTS, INC.

592 F.3d 1201, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 232, 108 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 111, 2010 WL 20987

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jan 6, 2010 | Docket: 1152239

Cited 51 times | Published

conduct, resulting in injury or damage. Fla. Stat. § 768.72(2). Decades of Florida case law have made it clear

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Martin

53 So. 3d 1060, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 19008, 2010 WL 5074839

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 14, 2010 | Docket: 2406698

Cited 44 times | Published

in compensatory damages awarded Mrs. Martin. Section 768.72(2), Florida Statutes, requires a plaintiff

Bankest Imports, Inc. v. Isca Corp.

717 F. Supp. 1537, 1989 WL 81343

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 19, 1989 | Docket: 316507

Cited 44 times | Published

with the pleading requirements set forth in Section 768.72, Florida Statutes.[4] Upon review of this matter

Cohen v. Office Depot, Inc.

184 F.3d 1292, 1999 WL 622013

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 17, 1999 | Docket: 212261

Cited 43 times | Published

opinion in this case, we held that Florida Statute § 768.72 conflicts with and must yield to the "short

Thompson v. Kindred Nursing Centers East, LLC

211 F. Supp. 2d 1345, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10210, 2002 WL 1257767

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 16, 2002 | Docket: 2437549

Cited 42 times | Published

1069 (11th Cir.2000) (holding that Fla. Stat. § 768.72, requiring an evidentiary showing before pleading

Jarzynka v. St. Thomas University School of Law

310 F. Supp. 2d 1256, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5376, 2004 WL 615642

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 23, 2004 | Docket: 2291722

Cited 40 times | Published

Florida law provides, pursuant to Fla. Statute § 768.72(1), that In any civil action, no claim for punitive

Burger King Corp. v. Austin

805 F. Supp. 1007, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16273, 1992 WL 309059

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 9, 1992 | Docket: 241770

Cited 38 times | Published

1569, 1576 (S.D.Fla.1991), holding that Fla.Stat. § 768.72 is inapplicable to federal diversity actions.

Estate of Despain v. Avante Group, Inc.

900 So. 2d 637, 2005 WL 672090

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 24, 2005 | Docket: 463202

Cited 37 times | Published

plead a claim for punitive damages pursuant to section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (1999). The decedent,

MEE INDUSTRIES v. Dow Chemical Co.

608 F.3d 1202, 76 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 1732, 95 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1737, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 12175, 2010 WL 2367119

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jun 15, 2010 | Docket: 1544442

Cited 35 times | Published

intentional misconduct or gross negligence." Fla. Stat. § 768.72(2) (2005). In order to demonstrate intentional

Holmes v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc.

891 So. 2d 1188, 2005 WL 235843

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 2, 2005 | Docket: 1349782

Cited 30 times | Published

Firestone was only twenty-percent responsible. Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2000), provides that claims

State of Wisconsin Investment Board v. Plantation Square Associates, Ltd.

761 F. Supp. 1569, 20 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 674, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5012, 1991 WL 57906

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 6, 1991 | Docket: 1273592

Cited 30 times | Published

damages for failure to comply with Florida Statutes § 768.72.[2] That statute, which came into law as § 51

Knight v. EF Hutton and Co., Inc.

750 F. Supp. 1109, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15044, 1990 WL 176026

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 11, 1990 | Docket: 1041824

Cited 30 times | Published

stricken. The Court does not agree. Florida Statutes, § 768.72 states that "no claim for punitive damages shall

T.W.M. v. American Medical System, Inc.

886 F. Supp. 842, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7231, 1995 WL 319071

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 19, 1995 | Docket: 2448242

Cited 29 times | Published

requirements for punitive damages. Specifically, Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1993), provides: In any

Kingston Square Tenants Ass'n v. Tuskegee Gardens, Ltd.

792 F. Supp. 1566, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7366, 1992 WL 152239

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: May 26, 1992 | Docket: 1496566

Cited 29 times | Published

Reform Act, Fla.Stat. § 768.72 (1991).[12] The issue becomes whether § 768.72 is procedural or substantive

Bistline v. Rogers

215 So. 3d 607, 2017 WL 1174768, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 4176

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 29, 2017 | Docket: 60264841

Cited 27 times | Published

complied with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, [Florida Statutes (2016),] but not to review

Cohen v. Office Depot, Inc.

184 F.3d 1292

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 17, 1999 | Docket: 395462

Cited 26 times | Published

Cohen had failed to comply with Florida Statutes § 768.72, which requires a plaintiff to obtain leave from

Simeon, Inc. v. Cox

671 So. 2d 158, 1996 WL 154142

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Apr 4, 1996 | Docket: 1247870

Cited 26 times | Published

that plaintiffs did not strictly comply with section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1993), because they failed

NORMAN GUNDEL v. AV HOMES, INC. AND AVATAR PROPERTIES, INC.

264 So. 3d 304

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 1, 2019 | Docket: 14530833

Cited 24 times | Published

conformed with the procedural requirements of section 768.72[, Florida Statutes (1993)] . . . .").

Gandy v. Trans World Computer Tech. Group

787 So. 2d 116, 2001 WL 395425

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 20, 2001 | Docket: 2528626

Cited 21 times | Published

Gandy failed to comply with the requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1999). We express no opinion

Henn v. Sandler

589 So. 2d 1334, 1991 WL 134418

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 20, 1991 | Docket: 1441248

Cited 21 times | Published

the parties or their claims in that case, was section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1989), which provides as

Kraft Gen. Foods, Inc. v. Rosenblum

635 So. 2d 106, 1994 WL 112249

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 6, 1994 | Docket: 1353070

Cited 19 times | Published

statute we construed in Henn: viz., whether under section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1993), a pleader can include

Marcus v. Carrasquillo

782 F. Supp. 593, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 410, 1992 WL 6518

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jan 9, 1992 | Docket: 2052601

Cited 18 times | Published

supporting the demand for punitive damages. Section 768.72 of the Florida Statutes requires that the complaint

Varnedore v. Copeland

210 So. 3d 741

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 10, 2017 | Docket: 4586771

Cited 17 times | Published

damages in a civil action are enumerated in section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2015), and Florida Rule

Frio Ice, SA v. SunFruit

724 F. Supp. 1373, 1989 WL 134940

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Nov 6, 1989 | Docket: 1034132

Cited 17 times | Published

damages against Rodriguez, as required by Fla.Stat. § 768.72 (1986 Supp.1989). Thus, the punitive damages claim

H. Boone Porter, Iii, in His Capacity as Individual Co-Trustee of the H. Boone Porter Trust Created Under Deed of Trust Dated 8/1/60 as Amended by Amendment Dated 5/14/68, and Individually, and in His Capacity as of the Estate of Rev. H. Boone Porter, Commerce Bank, N.A., a National Banking Association, in Its Capacity as Corporate Co-Trustees of the H. Boone Porter Trust Created Under

241 F.3d 1334

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 27, 2001 | Docket: 600284

Cited 16 times | Published

concerning punitive damages is permitted." Fla. Stat. 768.72. Prior to allowing discovery of financial

International Ship Repair & Marine Services, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance

944 F. Supp. 886, 1997 A.M.C. 1419, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16941, 1996 WL 663715

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Nov 6, 1996 | Docket: 1624554

Cited 16 times | Published

pursuant to Section 768.72, Fla.Stat. (1995) and Rule 15(a), Fed. R.Civ.P. Section 768.72 provides, in

Citron v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc.

721 F. Supp. 1259, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12139, 1989 WL 120664

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 4, 1989 | Docket: 886595

Cited 16 times | Published

court is presented with the issue of whether section 768.72 of the Florida Statutes, which prohibits a

Blount v. Sterling Healthcare Group, Inc.

934 F. Supp. 1365, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11239, 1996 WL 444930

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: May 28, 1996 | Docket: 1780139

Cited 15 times | Published

comply with the pleading requirements of Fla.St. § 768.72. The Magistrate Judge found that Title VII does

Al-Site Corp. v. VSI International., Inc.

842 F. Supp. 507, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18952

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 1993 | Docket: 1246563

Cited 15 times | Published

While this contention may be accurate, Fla. Stat. § 768.72 (1992) sets out certain conditions which must

Dah Chong Hong, Ltd. v. Silk Greenhouse, Inc.

719 F. Supp. 1072, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10752, 1989 WL 102282

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 6, 1989 | Docket: 915979

Cited 15 times | Published

V, VI, and VII pursuant to Section 768.72, Florida Statutes. Section 768.72 prohibits a claim for punitive

Lewis v. Snap-On Tools Corp.

708 F. Supp. 1260, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2735, 1989 WL 25167

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 17, 1989 | Docket: 2235069

Cited 15 times | Published

VII, IX, XI, XII, XIII, and XIV. Pursuant to Section 768.72, Florida Statutes, in a civil action, ... no

Tillman v. C.R. Bard, Inc.

96 F. Supp. 3d 1307, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 40338, 2015 WL 1456657

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 30, 2015 | Docket: 64301333

Cited 14 times | Published

misconduct or gross negligence.” See Fla. Stat. § 768.72(2). The statute defines “intentional misconduct”

Whalen v. Prosser

719 So. 2d 2, 1998 WL 422189

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 29, 1998 | Docket: 1704990

Cited 14 times | Published

which the Whalens could seek punitive damages. See § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1997). [5] This may not be entirely

Lancer Arabians, Inc. v. Beech Aircraft Corp.

723 F. Supp. 1444, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12588, 1989 WL 128482

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 10, 1989 | Docket: 1197681

Cited 13 times | Published

plaintiff did not satisfy the strictures of Fla.Stat. § 768.72. Given plaintiff's timely objection to the Magistrate's

Melford v. Kahane & Assocs.

371 F. Supp. 3d 1116

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 1, 2019 | Docket: 64323723

Cited 12 times | Published

(11th Cir. 2010) (quoting Fla. Stat. § 768.72(2) ). Under § 768.72(3), punitive damages may be imposed

Kennedy v. Carnival Corp.

385 F. Supp. 3d 1302

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 6, 2019 | Docket: 64324884

Cited 12 times | Published

1202, 1220 (11th Cir. 2010) (quoting Fla.Stat. § 768.72(2) (2005) ). Plaintiff's amended complaint does

Rodolfo Valladares v. Bank of America Corporation, etc.

197 So. 3d 1, 41 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 252, 2016 WL 3090385, 2016 Fla. LEXIS 1150

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jun 2, 2016 | Docket: 3069352

Cited 12 times | Published

punitive damages pursuant to Florida Statutes, section 768.72 (1999), Valladares did not include an allegation

Renee Koutsouradis v. Delta Air Lines

427 F.3d 1339, 2005 WL 1901798, 2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 16872

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 10, 2005 | Docket: 1118861

Cited 12 times | Published

employment. She claims that Fla. Stab. § 768.72(3) is consistent with this theory. Delta

Tableau Fine Art Group, Inc. v. Jacoboni

853 So. 2d 299, 28 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 412, 2003 Fla. LEXIS 824, 2003 WL 21191751

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: May 22, 2003 | Docket: 1189516

Cited 12 times | Published

damages. Jacoboni filed the motion pursuant to section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (1999), which provides

Teel v. United Technologies Pratt & Whitney

953 F. Supp. 1534, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2147, 1997 WL 71826

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 17, 1997 | Docket: 1247487

Cited 12 times | Published

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, arguing that section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1995), precludes such pleading

Sanders v. Mayor's Jewelers, Inc.

942 F. Supp. 571, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14223, 70 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 44,654, 76 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 355, 1996 WL 550129

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 2, 1996 | Docket: 1247485

Cited 12 times | Published

Specifically, Defendants assert that Fla.Stat. § 768.72 applies in this action to prevent Sanders's punitive

Gleneagle Ship Management v. Leondakos

602 So. 2d 1282, 1992 WL 163936

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 16, 1992 | Docket: 2447109

Cited 12 times | Published

non conveniens; and 7) failure to comply with section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1989) (no claim for punitive

Fairway Golfview Homes, Inc. v. Kecskes (In Re Kecskes)

136 B.R. 578, 6 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 1, 1992 Bankr. LEXIS 293

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. | Filed: Feb 10, 1992 | Docket: 1828829

Cited 12 times | Published

the Property. The court also found cause under § 768.72, Florida Statutes (1989) to award punitive damages

Hall v. Lexington Ins. Co.

895 So. 2d 1161, 2005 WL 356956

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 16, 2005 | Docket: 2514897

Cited 11 times | Published

before a claim for punitive damages is allowed, section 768.72 requires a plaintiff to make an initial showing

First Healthcare Corp. v. Hamilton

740 So. 2d 1189, 1999 WL 436802

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 18, 1999 | Docket: 1456563

Cited 11 times | Published

compensatory damages, and later, pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1995), was granted leave

Turner v. Fitzsimmons

673 So. 2d 532, 1996 WL 225719

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 7, 1996 | Docket: 1671462

Cited 11 times | Published

Florida Supreme Court recently ruled, under section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1993), a plaintiff is required

Quilling v. Price

894 So. 2d 1061, 2005 WL 264118

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 4, 2005 | Docket: 2483901

Cited 10 times | Published

punitive damages, since he has not complied with section 768.72 of the Florida Statutes, his claim for punitive

Fleetwood Homes of Florida, Inc. v. Reeves

833 So. 2d 857, 2002 WL 31875183

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 2002 | Docket: 1259184

Cited 10 times | Published

and convincing evidence of gross negligence. See § 768.72(2), Fla. Stat. (2000), amended by ch. 99-225,

Key West Convalescent Center v. Doherty

619 So. 2d 367, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 5848, 1993 WL 174255

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 25, 1993 | Docket: 1721690

Cited 10 times | Published

punitive damages claim as provided for in *369 section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1991).[1] We agree and hold

Aerovias Nacionales De Columbia, SA v. Tellez

596 So. 2d 1193

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 7, 1992 | Docket: 2448526

Cited 10 times | Published

Restatement (Second) of Conflicts §§ 122, 127 (1971). Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1989), provides, as a procedural

Will v. Systems Engineering Consultants, Inc.

554 So. 2d 591, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 7074, 1989 WL 153771

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 19, 1989 | Docket: 2448226

Cited 10 times | Published

disclosure of financial worth are governed by section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1987), which provides: In

Douse v. Bos. Scientific Corp.

314 F. Supp. 3d 1251

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: May 14, 2018 | Docket: 64319038

Cited 9 times | Published

"intentional misconduct or gross negligence." Fla. Stat. § 768.72(1) - (2) ; see also Gerlach v. Cincinnati Ins

Tiger Point Golf and Country Club v. Hipple

977 So. 2d 608, 2007 WL 4438923

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 2007 | Docket: 1529610

Cited 9 times | Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages." § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2006). This provision has been

Horizons Rehabilitation, Inc. v. Health Care and Retirement Corp.

810 So. 2d 958, 2002 WL 10062

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 15, 2002 | Docket: 1223902

Cited 9 times | Published

without prior trial court authorization, pursuant to § 768.72.[5]Mayer v. Frank, 659 So.2d 1254 (Fla. 4th DCA

IBP, Inc. v. Hady Enterprises, Inc.

267 F. Supp. 2d 1148, 51 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d (West) 950, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18777, 2002 WL 32113050

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 2002 | Docket: 2439983

Cited 9 times | Published

misconduct or gross negligence. See FLA. STAT. ANN. § 768.72 (West Supp.2002). The Florida legislature has

St. Mary's Hosp. v. Bell

785 So. 2d 1261, 2001 WL 609240

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 6, 2001 | Docket: 1510164

Cited 9 times | Published

to allow a claim for punitive damages under section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2000). Id. at 1149. We cited

Jeong Min Kim v. Keenan

71 F. Supp. 2d 1228, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17745, 13 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 83

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Nov 3, 1999 | Docket: 2368891

Cited 9 times | Published

Complaint. Defendants assert that Fla. Stat. Ann. § 768.72 (West 1999) clearly provides that "no claim for

Tutor Time Child Care Systems, Inc. v. Franks Investment Group, Inc.

966 F. Supp. 1188, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8025, 1997 WL 306874

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 4, 1997 | Docket: 1596234

Cited 9 times | Published

to comply with the pleading requirements of section 768.72 of the Florida Statutes. This District's judges

McCarthy v. Barnett Bank of Polk County

750 F. Supp. 1119, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15065, 1990 WL 175343

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 15, 1990 | Docket: 1041982

Cited 9 times | Published

controls their request. The relevant statute, Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1989), states that a reasonable

Holden v. Bober

39 So. 3d 396, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 9131, 2010 WL 2507279

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 2010 | Docket: 1923934

Cited 8 times | Published

plaintiff has made a `reasonable showing' under section 768.72 for a recovery of punitive damages, it is similar

BDO Seidman, LLP v. Banco Espirito Santo International

38 So. 3d 874, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 9119, 2010 WL 2507051

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 2010 | Docket: 1658356

Cited 8 times | Published

predicate for a punitive damages claim) in section 768.72(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2007): "Gross negligence"

Amoco Oil Co. v. Caroline Gomez

379 F.3d 1266, 2004 U.S. App. LEXIS 16245, 2004 WL 1764111

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 6, 2004 | Docket: 398137

Cited 8 times | Published

failure to comply with Fla.Stat. § 768.72. (14) The demand for trial by jury set

St. John v. Coisman

799 So. 2d 1110, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 16277, 2001 WL 1434195

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 16, 2001 | Docket: 1681643

Cited 8 times | Published

committed by the Defendant in the instant case, see section 768.72(2)(a) and(b), Florida Statutes (1999), I need

Porter v. Ogden, Newell & Welch

241 F.3d 1334, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 2236, 2001 WL 128333

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 15, 2001 | Docket: 396450

Cited 8 times | Published

sought punitive damages pursuant to Florida Stat. § 768.72. On. cross-motions for summary judgment, the district

Dadic v. Schneider

722 So. 2d 921, 1998 WL 870855

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 9, 1998 | Docket: 455748

Cited 8 times | Published

basis for such damages exists as required by section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1997). Globe Newspaper Co

Mahon v. City of Largo, Fla.

829 F. Supp. 377, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10534, 1993 WL 287397

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 26, 1993 | Docket: 1490395

Cited 8 times | Published

in the record to comply with Florida Statute Section 768.72, which provides that "no claim for punitive

Brennan v. City of Minneola, Fla.

723 F. Supp. 1442, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12616, 1989 WL 128483

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 13, 1989 | Docket: 1198243

Cited 8 times | Published

Defendants' second assertion is that Fla. Stat. § 768.72 bars the claim for punitive damages at this time

Tilton v. Wrobel

198 So. 3d 909, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 11418, 2016 WL 4035718

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 27, 2016 | Docket: 60256508

Cited 7 times | Published

punitive damages on a claim of defamation per se. See § 768.72, Fla. 'Stat. (2015). The petitioners contend the

Bailey v. St. Louis

196 So. 3d 375, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 1375, 41 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 321

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 3, 2016 | Docket: 3033838

Cited 7 times | Published

establish a factual basis for punitive damages. Section 768.72(2), Florida Statutes (2006), provides that

Ross Dress for Less Virginia, Inc. v. Castro

134 So. 3d 511, 2014 WL 853656, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 3062

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 5, 2014 | Docket: 60239261

Cited 7 times | Published

amendment to allow a claim for punitive damages Section 768.72 of the Florida Statutes creates a “substantive

Hogan v. Provident Life & Accident Insurance

665 F. Supp. 2d 1273, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 95921

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Oct 15, 2009 | Docket: 2379872

Cited 7 times | Published

statutory violations in Counts I—III. Pursuant to § 768.72, Florida Statutes, punitive damages on the common

Hialeah Automotive, LLC v. Basulto

22 So. 3d 586, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 566, 2009 WL 187584

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 28, 2009 | Docket: 60267074

Cited 7 times | Published

proceedings where there is a fraud claim. See § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2004); First Interstate Dev. Corp

Tran v. Waste Management, Inc.

290 F. Supp. 2d 1286, 2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20410, 2003 WL 22576750

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 1, 2003 | Docket: 2486830

Cited 7 times | Published

removal of this action"). [1] Under Fla. Stat. § 768.72, "gross negligence" means that "the defendant's

Norwegian Cruise Lines, Ltd. v. Zareno

712 So. 2d 791, 1998 WL 329732

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 24, 1998 | Docket: 1471656

Cited 7 times | Published

punitive damages based upon failure to comply with Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1997). In October of 1997

Solis v. Calvo

689 So. 2d 366, 1997 WL 65857

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 19, 1997 | Docket: 1739247

Cited 7 times | Published

hearing. This claim is based upon Florida Statute section 768.72 (1995) which provides in part: In any civil

Mayer v. Frank

659 So. 2d 1254, 1995 WL 509229

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 30, 1995 | Docket: 1748136

Cited 7 times | Published

motion to strike a punitive damages claim. Section 768.72, Florida Statutes, provides that "... no claim

Fletcher v. State of Fla.

858 F. Supp. 169, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9543, 1994 WL 371365

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 1, 1994 | Docket: 2106945

Cited 7 times | Published

1080 (11th Cir.1986). Under Florida Statutes, § 768.72, the plaintiff cannot bring a claim for punitive

Wolper Ross Ingham & Co. v. Liedman

544 So. 2d 307, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1317, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2991, 1989 WL 56013

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 30, 1989 | Docket: 1709739

Cited 7 times | Published

punitive damages and, accordingly, is governed by section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1987), which provides as

Wayne Frier Home Center of Pensacola, Inc. v. Cadlerock Joint Venture, L.P.

16 So. 3d 1006, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 12856, 2009 WL 2777094

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 1, 2009 | Docket: 1125645

Cited 6 times | Published

punitive damages, a party must comply with section 768.72, Florida Statutes. Leavins v. Crystal, 3 So

Morton v. Polivchak

931 So. 2d 935, 2006 WL 1041839

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 21, 2006 | Docket: 1522211

Cited 6 times | Published

generally are available for intentional torts. See § 768.72(2), Fla. Stat. (2003). In view of this principle

Endacott v. International Hospitality, Inc.

910 So. 2d 915, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 14860, 2005 WL 2219478

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 14, 2005 | Docket: 2488351

Cited 6 times | Published

Co. v. King, 658 So.2d 518, 520 (Fla.1995); see § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1999). The plaintiff is required

OneBeacon Ins. Co. v. DELTA FIRE SPRINKLERS

898 So. 2d 113, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 2218, 2005 WL 430346

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 25, 2005 | Docket: 1448046

Cited 6 times | Published

without first complying with the requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2001).[1] Delta Fire furnished

Herrera v. CA Seguros Catatumbo

844 So. 2d 664, 2003 WL 1722811

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 2, 2003 | Docket: 1197131

Cited 6 times | Published

Cases, No. 96-1, 689 So.2d 1042, 1044 (Fla.1997); § 768.72(2), Fla. Stat. (2001). Under this standard, malice

MUNROE REG. HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC. v. Estate of Gonzales

795 So. 2d 1133, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 13880, 2001 WL 1174300

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 5, 2001 | Docket: 1252450

Cited 6 times | Published

conformed with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes, in allowing a punitive damages

Allstate Ins. v. AMERICAN SOUTHERN HOME

680 So. 2d 1114, 1996 WL 587878

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 11, 1996 | Docket: 1663829

Cited 6 times | Published

in light of the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes, which requires a trial court

Florida Farm Bureau Cas. Ins. Co. v. Patterson

611 So. 2d 558, 1992 WL 383009

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 22, 1992 | Docket: 1699768

Cited 6 times | Published

complaint to add a demand for punitive damages. See § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1987). Regarding the proper measure

Sussman v. SALEM, SAXON AND NIELSEN, PA

792 F. Supp. 1278, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 7755, 59 Empl. Prac. Dec. (CCH) 41,693, 59 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 143, 1992 WL 124457

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: May 29, 1992 | Docket: 1496459

Cited 6 times | Published

and a jury trial pursuant to Florida Statutes § 768.72, and in the alternative compensatory damages under

L.S.T., Inc. v. Crow

772 F. Supp. 1254, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 12954, 1991 WL 183331

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 12, 1991 | Docket: 1402416

Cited 6 times | Published

of punitive damages under Florida Statutes section 768.72 (1989), and therefore the State Tort Punitive

Mitchell v. Consolidated Freightways Corp. of Del.

747 F. Supp. 1446, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13515, 1990 WL 154625

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 24, 1990 | Docket: 963255

Cited 6 times | Published

damages claim for failure to comply with Fla.Stat. § 768.72. Last, defendant argues that the cause of action

TRG Desert Inn Venture, Ltd. v. Berezovsky

194 So. 3d 516, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 9228, 2016 WL 3265754

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 15, 2016 | Docket: 3078612

Cited 5 times | Published

conformed to the procedural requirements ■ of section 768.72 of the Florida Statutes, we are compelled to

Goodin v. Bank of America N.A.

114 F. Supp. 3d 1197, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 81318, 2015 WL 3866872

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 2015 | Docket: 64302853

Cited 5 times | Published

Bank of America points out, however, Fla. Stat. § 768.72 was amended in 1999, subsequent to the decision

Geico General Insurance Co. v. Hoy

136 So. 3d 647, 2013 WL 6690683, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 20136

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 2013 | Docket: 60240051

Cited 5 times | Published

recovery of [punitive] damages” as required by section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2003). This issue does

Geico General Insurance Co. v. Hoy

136 So. 3d 647, 2013 WL 6690683, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 20136

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 20, 2013 | Docket: 60240051

Cited 5 times | Published

recovery of [punitive] damages” as required by section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2003). This issue does

Gutierrez v. Rubio

126 So. 3d 320, 2013 WL 1316383, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 5384

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 3, 2013 | Docket: 60236404

Cited 5 times | Published

orders.”), superseded by statute on other grounds, § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1986), as recognized in Henn v. Sandler

Coronado Condominium Ass'n v. Corte

103 So. 3d 239, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 21308, 2012 WL 6177408

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 12, 2012 | Docket: 60227017

Cited 5 times | Published

to employers and corporate defendants under section 768.72(3), Florida Statutes (2012), we grant the petition

Soffer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

106 So. 3d 456, 2012 WL 5233477, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 18385

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 24, 2012 | Docket: 60228206

Cited 5 times | Published

749 So.2d 483, 486 (Fla.1999). Pursuant to section 768.72(2), Florida Statutes (2005), a defendant may

Oken v. Williams

23 So. 3d 140, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 14590, 2009 WL 3103853

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 30, 2009 | Docket: 1180414

Cited 5 times | Published

request to add punitive damages pursuant to section 768.72 in some instances, stating: In Kraft General

Southstar Equity, LLC v. Lai Chau

998 So. 2d 625, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 1442, 2008 WL 313606

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 6, 2008 | Docket: 1341845

Cited 5 times | Published

an insufficient basis for punitive damages. Section 768.72(2), Florida Statutes (2001), provides for the

Williams v. Tandem Health Care of Florida

899 So. 2d 369, 2005 WL 700953

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 29, 2005 | Docket: 1705716

Cited 5 times | Published

standard. It points out that the court relied on section 768.72(3), Florida Statutes (2000), which provides

Williams v. Tandem Health Care of Florida

899 So. 2d 369, 2005 WL 700953

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 29, 2005 | Docket: 1705716

Cited 5 times | Published

standard. It points out that the court relied on section 768.72(3), Florida Statutes (2000), which provides

MS v. Nova Southeastern University Inc.

881 So. 2d 614, 2004 WL 1620851

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 21, 2004 | Docket: 1465517

Cited 5 times | Published

to adhere to the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2002). See generally Globe

Primerica Financial Services, Inc. v. Mitchell

48 F. Supp. 2d 1363, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5902, 1999 WL 242419

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jan 13, 1999 | Docket: 2287195

Cited 5 times | Published

*1371 V. The Pleading Provisions of Fla.Stat. § 768.72 Do Not Apply To State Claims Being Litigated In

Ortega v. Silva

712 So. 2d 1148, 1998 WL 299658

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 10, 1998 | Docket: 1471862

Cited 5 times | Published

conformed with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, but do not have certiorari jurisdiction to

Pease v. Medtronic, Inc.

6 F. Supp. 2d 1354, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8479, 1998 WL 310718

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: May 15, 1998 | Docket: 2176506

Cited 5 times | Published

claim for punitive damages pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 768.72. The Honorable Phillip Bloom, Circuit Court Judge

WFTV, Inc. v. Hinn

705 So. 2d 1010, 1998 WL 44582

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 6, 1998 | Docket: 1582227

Cited 5 times | Published

court followed the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes). Respondent, Christopher

Sparks v. Jay's A.C. & Refrigeration, Inc.

971 F. Supp. 1433, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16558, 1997 WL 404019

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 15, 1997 | Docket: 1486151

Cited 5 times | Published

the provisions of Florida Statute § 768.72. Pursuant to section 768.72, "no claim for punitive damages

Canto v. JB Ivey and Co.

595 So. 2d 1025, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 2287, 1992 WL 42456

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 9, 1992 | Docket: 1709097

Cited 5 times | Published

appellants had not made a proper showing under Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1989), that they were entitled

Fla. Hosp. Med. Servs., LLC v. Newsholme

255 So. 3d 348

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 5, 2018 | Docket: 64689218

Cited 4 times | Published

order, the court acknowledged that, pursuant to section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes, Plaintiffs needed to

Lucille Ruth Soffer, etc. v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

187 So. 3d 1219, 41 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 101, 2016 Fla. LEXIS 554, 2016 WL 1065605

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 17, 2016 | Docket: 3045366

Cited 4 times | Published

showing by evidence in the record,” pursuant to section 768,72(1), Florida Statutes. Third, the legal

Case v. Newman

154 So. 3d 1151, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 20438, 2014 WL 7202971

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 17, 2014 | Docket: 60245432

Cited 4 times | Published

complaint to add a claim for punitive damages.6 Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2014), provides in part:

Shotts v. OP Winter Haven, Inc.

988 So. 2d 639, 2008 WL 2435576

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 18, 2008 | Docket: 1722231

Cited 4 times | Published

the complaint to allege punitive damages. See § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2003). In response to the complaint

BEVERLY HEALTH & REHAB. SERVS. v. Meeks

778 So. 2d 322, 2000 WL 1873093

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 2000 | Docket: 1686931

Cited 4 times | Published

the procedural requirements associated with section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1999). See Globe Newspaper

Ortega Trujillo v. Banco Central Del Ecuador

17 F. Supp. 2d 1340, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13284, 1998 WL 546959

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 14, 1998 | Docket: 1241043

Cited 4 times | Published

C. § 1330(a), 28 U.S.C. § 1602 et seq., and section 768.72 of the Florida Statutes. Plaintiffs filed their

Alexander v. University/Gainesville Healthcare Center, Inc.

17 F. Supp. 2d 1291, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8948, 1998 WL 307441

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 11, 1998 | Docket: 2356304

Cited 4 times | Published

for failure to comply with Florida Statutes Section 768.72, which provides: In any civil action, no claim

Potter v. SAK Development Corp.

678 So. 2d 472, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8833, 1996 WL 464168

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 16, 1996 | Docket: 1470722

Cited 4 times | Published

complied with *473 the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1995), which has recently

Commercial Carrier Corp. v. Rockhead

639 So. 2d 660, 1994 WL 316334

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 5, 1994 | Docket: 1712725

Cited 4 times | Published

punitive damages claim as unjustified under section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1991) is reviewable by certiorari

Cat Cay Yacht Club, Inc. v. Diaz

264 So. 3d 1071

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 30, 2019 | Docket: 64705094

Cited 3 times | Published

considered to constitute a "reasonable basis" ( section 768.72(1) ) for the recovery of punitive damages.

MARK H. LEINBERGER and KYLE FORMAN v. JOEL MAGEE

226 So. 3d 899, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 12062, 2017 WL 3616403

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 23, 2017 | Docket: 6142266

Cited 3 times | Published

intended to allow a punitive damages claim. Section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2016), provides that

Kelly Paton v. Geico General Insurance Co.

190 So. 3d 1047, 41 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 115, 2016 Fla. LEXIS 631, 2016 WL 1163372

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Mar 24, 2016 | Docket: 3047815

Cited 3 times | Published

1987), superseded by statute on other grounds, § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1989)))., To be entitled to certiorari

Petri Positive Pest Control, Inc. v. CCM Condominium Association, Inc. d/b/a Country Club Manor Condominium Association

174 So. 3d 1122, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 14074, 2015 WL 5613369

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 24, 2015 | Docket: 2851143

Cited 3 times | Published

assert a punitive damages claim. See § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2014). Certiorari review is available

Eagle FL VI SPE, LLC v. Cypress Creek Plaza, LLC

128 So. 3d 950, 2013 WL 6925388, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 20493

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 27, 2013 | Docket: 60237240

Cited 3 times | Published

1987), superseded by statute on other grounds, § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1989). The trial court’s order departs

Bertoni v. Stock Bldg. Supply

989 So. 2d 670, 2008 WL 2906898

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 30, 2008 | Docket: 1665239

Cited 3 times | Published

plaintiff failed to make a reasonable showing under section 768.72, Florida Statutes, for a recovery of punitive

Ward v. ESTALEIRO ITAJAI S/A

541 F. Supp. 2d 1344, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29013, 2008 WL 878937

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 31, 2008 | Docket: 2132569

Cited 3 times | Published

protective order, arguing that Florida Statutes § 768.72(1) requires that before Plaintiff may engage in

BB In Technology Co. v. JAF, LLC

242 F.R.D. 632, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29792, 2007 WL 1203008

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 30, 2007 | Docket: 66030414

Cited 3 times | Published

punitive damages violates Florida Statutes section 768.72, which bars a punitive damages claim “unless

In Re Asbestos Litigation

933 So. 2d 613, 2006 WL 1751755

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 28, 2006 | Docket: 1308491

Cited 3 times | Published

damages. Globe Newspaper, 658 So.2d at 520. Section 768.72 provides that, before a plaintiff may seek

All About Cruises, Inc. v. CRUISE OPTIONS

889 So. 2d 905, 2004 WL 2823244

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 8, 2004 | Docket: 1742788

Cited 3 times | Published

as premature punitive damage discovery under section 768.72. Neither should be countenanced before final

Neill v. Gulf Stream Coach, Inc.

966 F. Supp. 1149, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13339, 1997 WL 298917

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: May 29, 1997 | Docket: 803484

Cited 3 times | Published

strike those allegations based upon Fla.Stat. § 768.72, et seq. which establish special requirements

Sports Products, Inc. of Fort Lauderdale v. Estate of Inalien Ex Rel. Inalien

658 So. 2d 1010, 1994 WL 706778

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 21, 1994 | Docket: 2580912

Cited 3 times | Published

sufficient to comply with the requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes, thereby permitting amendment

DiBernardo v. Waste Management, Inc. of Florida

838 F. Supp. 567, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17037, 63 Fair Empl. Prac. Cas. (BNA) 762, 1993 WL 502551

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Nov 16, 1993 | Docket: 2107845

Cited 3 times | Published

other grounds 798 F.2d 1355 (11th Cir.1986). Section 768.72, Florida Statutes, prohibits a claim for punitive

Morris v. Crow

825 F. Supp. 295, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8793, 1993 WL 230793

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 1993 | Docket: 1607996

Cited 3 times | Published

INDIVIDUAL CAPACITY According to Fla.Stat. Section 768.72 (1991), "In any civil action, no claim for

Edgewater Sun Spot, Inc. v. Bay Bank & Trust Co. (In Re Edgewater Sun Spot, Inc.)

154 B.R. 338, 7 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 113, 1993 Bankr. LEXIS 695, 1993 WL 166449

United States Bankruptcy Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 12, 1993 | Docket: 1441659

Cited 3 times | Published

sustain a punitive damages claim in accordance with § 768.72 of the Florida Statutes. For the reasons set forth

KIS GROUP, LLC, ALERION MANAGEMENT GROUP, LLC and RICARDO DEAVILA v. YVES MOQUIN

263 So. 3d 63

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 2, 2019 | Docket: 8468340

Cited 2 times | Published

failed to follow the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes, we grant the petition.

Fetlar, LLC v. Suarez

230 So. 3d 97

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 6, 2017 | Docket: 6148138

Cited 2 times | Published

such claims against corporate defendants under section 768.72(3), Florida Statutes (2016), we grant the petition

Owens-Benniefield v. Nationstar Mortgage LLC

258 F. Supp. 3d 1300

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 15, 2017 | Docket: 64314538

Cited 2 times | Published

seeking punitive damages under Florida Statute § 768,72 cannot state a claim by merely making conclu-sory

Lorraine Campbell and Charles Lamm v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

204 So. 3d 476, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 10377

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 6, 2016 | Docket: 4108192

Cited 2 times | Published

claims and defenses by court”), and § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2015) (“In any civil action, no claim

Leavins v. Crystal

3 So. 3d 1270, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2143, 2009 WL 591782

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 10, 2009 | Docket: 2074236

Cited 2 times | Published

Damages," on the grounds that this claim violated section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2008), and the rules of

Capco Properties v. MONTEREY GARDENS

982 So. 2d 1211, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 7236, 2008 WL 2152041

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 23, 2008 | Docket: 1422284

Cited 2 times | Published

ordered premature punitive damage discovery under section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2003). By allowing this

Branche v. Airtran Airways, Inc.

314 F. Supp. 2d 1194, 21 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1533, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6877, 2004 WL 859319

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 19, 2004 | Docket: 2337970

Cited 2 times | Published

448.105[1] of the FWA and Florida Statutes Section 768.72 as creating a substantive right for a FWA plaintiff

Sanchez v. Degoria

733 So. 2d 1103, 1999 WL 314133

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 19, 1999 | Docket: 1188885

Cited 2 times | Published

comply with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes. Specifically, the motion

Stephanos v. Paine

727 So. 2d 1075, 1999 WL 89731

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 24, 1999 | Docket: 2579545

Cited 2 times | Published

respondent. WARNER, J. Contrary to the provisions of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1997), the respondent filed

Metcalf v. Beverly Health & Rehabilitation Services, Inc.

32 F. Supp. 2d 1307, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3091, 1999 WL 14252

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: Jan 8, 1999 | Docket: 2208184

Cited 2 times | Published

damages. Plaintiff assumes she must comply with § 768.72, Florida Statutes, which requires the submission

Rowe v. City of Fort Lauderdale

8 F. Supp. 2d 1369, 1998 WL 244592

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: May 6, 1998 | Docket: 2472891

Cited 2 times | Published

Various defendants assert that under Fla. Stat. § 768.72, Rowe's demand for punitive damages is premature

South Broward Hosp. Dist. v. Dupont

683 So. 2d 1135, 1996 WL 710800

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 1996 | Docket: 466193

Cited 2 times | Published

conformed with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida *1136 Statutes, regarding punitive

Walt Disney World Co. v. Noordhoek

672 So. 2d 98, 1996 WL 194330

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 1996 | Docket: 1760730

Cited 2 times | Published

comply with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1995) when it permitted

Water International Network, U.S.A., Inc. v. East

892 F. Supp. 1477, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9855, 1995 WL 416326

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 7, 1995 | Docket: 2139985

Cited 2 times | Published

claim for punitive damages. Florida Statute Section 768.72 prohibits a claim for punitive damages "unless

Williams v. Florida East Coast Railway Co.

552 So. 2d 279, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2657, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6546, 1989 WL 136804

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 14, 1989 | Docket: 64646341

Cited 2 times | Published

occurred in 1983, the procedure outlined in section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1987), is not applicable

Tallahassee Memorial HealthCare, Inc. v. Cherelle Dukes

272 So. 3d 824

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 16, 2019 | Docket: 15620951

Cited 1 times | Published

claim in a civil action in Florida is governed by § 768.72, Florida Statutes. A punitive damages claim can

Doe v. Celebrity Cruises, Inc.

389 F. Supp. 3d 1109

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: May 9, 2019 | Docket: 64325236

Cited 1 times | Published

1202, 1220 (11th Cir. 2010) (citing Fla. Stat. § 768.72(2)(a) ). The Eleventh Circuit has described instances

Cat Cay Yacht Club, Inc. v. Diaz

264 So. 3d 1071

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 30, 2019 | Docket: 64705095

Cited 1 times | Published

considered to constitute a "reasonable basis" ( section 768.72(1) ) for the recovery of punitive damages.

Levin v. Pritchard III

258 So. 3d 545

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 31, 2018 | Docket: 8110459

Cited 1 times | Published

assert a claim for punitive damages pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2018). Because we find

Levin v. Pritchard III

258 So. 3d 545

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 31, 2018 | Docket: 8110459

Cited 1 times | Published

assert a claim for punitive damages pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2018). Because we find

Pauline Burkhart v. R.J.Reynolds Tobacco Company

884 F.3d 1068

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Mar 7, 2018 | Docket: 6326504

Cited 1 times | Published

misconduct or gross negligence." Fla. Stat. § 768.72 (2). The statute then defines "intentional

US Bank National Association, etc. v. Jason Tranumn and D'Honour Tranumn

247 So. 3d 567

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 1, 2018 | Docket: 6250222

Cited 1 times | Published

1987), superseded by statute on other grounds, § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1989). The material injury

WG Evergreen Woods SH, LLC v. Fares

207 So. 3d 993, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 19239

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 2016 | Docket: 63631913

Cited 1 times | Published

like the more general punitive damage statute, section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2015), provides that

Faith Freight Forwarding Corp. v. Anias

206 So. 3d 753, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 14527

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 28, 2016 | Docket: 4426700

Cited 1 times | Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages.” § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2014). Finally, we reverse

HCA Health Services of Florida, Inc., d/b/a St. Lucie Medical Center v. Sarah Byers-McPheeters Bryan McPhetters Michael Anthony Meloni, Jr., M.D. J.H. Gatewood Emergency Services, P.A.

201 So. 3d 669, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 10024

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 29, 2016 | Docket: 3088367

Cited 1 times | Published

assert a punitive damages claim. See § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2015). Certiorari review is available

Kondell v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc.

187 F. Supp. 3d 1348, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 91838, 2016 WL 3554922

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: May 9, 2016 | Docket: 64308891

Cited 1 times | Published

Montoya, 94 F.Supp.3d at 22 (citing Fla. Stat. § 768.72) (noting that plaintiff could bring a common law

Mason v. Janssen

113 So. 3d 41, 2012 WL 4039272, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 15393

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 14, 2012 | Docket: 60231552

Cited 1 times | Published

certiorari.”), superseded on other grounds by statute, § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1989). But we distinguish this order

Webster v. Martin Memorial Medical Center, Inc.

57 So. 3d 896, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 2656, 2011 WL 710157

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 2, 2011 | Docket: 60299179

Cited 1 times | Published

amend to add a claim for punitive damages under section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2002), since it does not

Belle Glade Chevrolet-Cadillac Buick Pontiac Oldsmobile, Inc. v. Figgie

54 So. 3d 991, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 19092, 2010 WL 5093174

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 15, 2010 | Docket: 60298410

Cited 1 times | Published

the egregiousness of Belle Glade’s conduct. Section 768.72(2), Florida Statutes (2009) (emphasis added)

Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Doe

44 So. 3d 230, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 14492, 2010 WL 3766814

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 29, 2010 | Docket: 60295582

Cited 1 times | Published

AUTHORIZING AN AMENDMENT FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES Section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2009), provides that

Ford Motor Company v. HALL-EDWARDS

5 So. 3d 786, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 2508, 2009 WL 763618

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 25, 2009 | Docket: 424821

Cited 1 times | Published

conformed to the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2008). Accordingly, we remand

316, Inc. v. Maryland Casualty Co.

625 F. Supp. 2d 1179, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 41049, 2008 WL 2157084

District Court, N.D. Florida | Filed: May 21, 2008 | Docket: 2268219

Cited 1 times | Published

award of punitive damages pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 768.72[2], as limited by Fla. Stat. § 624.155(5)[3],

Carnival Corp. v. Iscoa

922 So. 2d 359, 2006 WL 471776

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 2006 | Docket: 1282646

Cited 1 times | Published

conformed with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, but do not have certiorari jurisdiction to

Carnival Corp. v. Iscoa

922 So. 2d 359, 2006 WL 471776

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 1, 2006 | Docket: 1282646

Cited 1 times | Published

conformed with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, but do not have certiorari jurisdiction to

M.B. Hayes, Inc. v. Tak Chin Choi (In Re M.B. Hayes, Inc.)

305 B.R. 361, 17 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 102, 2003 Bankr. LEXIS 1927

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Dec 17, 2003 | Docket: 1081784

Cited 1 times | Published

the general provisions of Florida Statutes Section 768.72. That section provides that no claim for punitive

Amendments to the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure

858 So. 2d 1013, 28 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 797, 2003 Fla. LEXIS 1779, 2003 WL 22410375

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Oct 23, 2003 | Docket: 64826361

Cited 1 times | Published

Inc. v. Meeks, 778 So.2d 322 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2002). We modify the Committee’s

Levin v. PALM COAST BUILDERS AND CONST., INC.

840 So. 2d 316, 2003 WL 289499

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 12, 2003 | Docket: 1748289

Cited 1 times | Published

pretrial stipulation, nor did they comply with section 768.72, Florida Statutes, which provide the procedure

Cypress Aviation, Inc. v. Bollea

826 So. 2d 1091, 2002 WL 31202273

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 4, 2002 | Docket: 1197865

Cited 1 times | Published

comply with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1999). See Globe Newspaper

O'KEEFE v. Darnell

192 F. Supp. 2d 1351, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3462, 2002 WL 377145

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 19, 2002 | Docket: 2285786

Cited 1 times | Published

Court of Appeals held that because Florida Statute § 768.72 conflicted with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure

John Hancock-Gannon Joint Venture II v. McNully

800 So. 2d 294, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 15261, 2001 WL 1334742

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 31, 2001 | Docket: 64810309

Cited 1 times | Published

Castro, that the owner was in pari delicto. . Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2000), relating to punitive

Vacation Break U.S.A., Inc. v. Marketing Response Group & Laser Co.

189 F.R.D. 474, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 15271, 1999 WL 782490

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 30, 1999 | Docket: 66010807

Cited 1 times | Published

claims for punitive damages under Florida Statute § 768.72. Even though no party to this action has alleged

Cohen v. Office Depot, Inc.

184 F.3d 1292, 44 Fed. R. Serv. 3d 757, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 19581

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 17, 1999 | Docket: 395463

Cited 1 times | Published

Cohen had failed to comply with Florida Statutes § 768.72, which requires a plaintiff to obtain leave from

Barton v. Hertz Corp.

35 F. Supp. 2d 1377, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1618, 1999 WL 80351

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Feb 11, 1999 | Docket: 2359151

Cited 1 times | Published

for punitive damages under Florida Statute, section 768.72, by not providing a "reasonable showing by

Gaines v. Russo

723 So. 2d 398, 1999 WL 9798

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 13, 1999 | Docket: 1320076

Cited 1 times | Published

damage claim without prejudice is affirmed. See § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1997). III. The orders under review

Hudson Hotels Corp. v. Seagate Beach Quarters, Inc.

696 So. 2d 867, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 5638, 1997 WL 273694

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 21, 1997 | Docket: 64774843

Cited 1 times | Published

but to grant respondent’s motion to amend. Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1995), creates a “substantive

State Capital Insurance Co. v. Mattey

689 So. 2d 1295, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 3210, 1997 WL 133862

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 26, 1997 | Docket: 64771843

Cited 1 times | Published

argued that insureds had not complied with section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1995) which requires the

Domke v. McNeil-P.P.C., Inc.

939 F. Supp. 849, 1996 WL 567165, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14788

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Sep 26, 1996 | Docket: 66007400

Cited 1 times | Published

Neither parties dispute that Florida Statute § 768.72 is substantive and must be applied by Federal

Simeon, Inc. v. Cox

655 So. 2d 156, 1995 WL 258085

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 5, 1995 | Docket: 1326861

Cited 1 times | Published

Martin-Johnson unless it has been superseded by section 768.72, Florida Statutes. The Fourth District in Kreft

Carlton Condominium Association, Inc. v. Dominique Miniaci

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 3, 2025 | Docket: 71259169

Published

by section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2024). At the hearing, Respondents argued section 768.72 does

Lauren Book v. Barbara Sharief

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 23, 2025 | Docket: 70891681

Published

negligence,” as those terms are defined in section 768.72(2), Florida Statutes (2024), and as required

Anthony Valentine and Paul Bettencourt v. Anthony Iaquinto

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 16, 2025 | Docket: 70808233

Published

recovery of punitive damages as required by section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2024). Background

Fernando Costantini Gomes v. Victor Maniglia

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 9, 2025 | Docket: 70740030

Published

required for seeking punitive damages under section 768.72 of the Florida Statutes (2024) and Florida

Marshall Milton Corp. v. Marc Andre Petit-Homme

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 2, 2025 | Docket: 70690851

Published

3d 826, 829 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022). Pursuant to section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2023), “no claim for

Menada, Inc., Etc. v. Gabriela Arevalo, Etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 18, 2025 | Docket: 70572352

Published

punitive damages pleading standard set forth in section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2024), which requires

JD Duff A/K/A Jonathan Duff v. Gillian Racine, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Alexis Nicole Racine

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 11, 2025 | Docket: 70513854

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages.” § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2024). In considering a motion

Monsanto Company v. Lawrence J. Behar

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 11, 2025 | Docket: 70513834

Published

So. 3d 186, 188 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024). Section 768.72, Florida Statutes, controls much of the punitive

Enrique Colado v. Laura Colado, Etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 30, 2025 | Docket: 70000166

Published

recovery of such damages.” § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2023). See also § 768.72(2)(a)-(b), Fla. Stat. (2023)

Joaquin Alexandre Coll v. 11USAGROUP, LLC

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 23, 2025 | Docket: 69929818

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of punitive damages. § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2024). Therefore, the trial court

Amazulu Transport, Inc., and Peter Stuart Welch, Jr. v. Gary Dinkins

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 14, 2025 | Docket: 69737438

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages.” § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2023). The trial court acts as

Whitehall at Bal Harbour Condominium Association, Inc. v. Yaffa Raviv

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 5, 2025 | Docket: 69705887

Published

damages claim By its adoption of section 768.72, the Florida Legislature put limits on how

Tesla, Inc., A/K/A Tesla Florida, Inc. v. Kim Banner, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Jeremy Banner

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 26, 2025 | Docket: 69674164

Published

legislature amended the punitive damages statute, section 768.72, Florida Statutes, into its current form. But

JVA Engineering Contractor, Inc. v. Doral 10, LLC

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 12, 2025 | Docket: 69632703

Published

showing below did not satisfy the requirements of section 768.72(3) of the Florida Statutes, governing punitive

940 Ocean Drive, LLC v. Sobe USA, LLC

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 29, 2025 | Docket: 69587491

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of punitive damages. See § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2024) (“In any civil action,

Comway Trade Logistics, LLC v. Sebastian Curet

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 22, 2025 | Docket: 69564926

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of punitive damages. § 768.72(1) Fla. Stat. (2024). Therefore, the trial court

Steven Vaziri v. Marena Jerkins

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 8, 2025 | Docket: 69525653

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages.” § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2024). “A defendant may be held

Five Fran, LLC v. Roy Davis

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 8, 2025 | Docket: 69525642

Published

the future.” Lindzon, 350 So. 3d at 829-30. Section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2024), provides that

Palm Bay Towers Condominium Association, Inc. v. Thomas Marrazza

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 2, 2025 | Docket: 69511742

Published

future.” Lindzon, 350 So. 3d at 829-30. Section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2024), provides that

Publix Super Markets, Inc. v. Levi

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 13, 2024 | Docket: 69463631

Published

357 So. 3d 703, 706 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023)). Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2023), thus limits claims

Progressive Select Insurance Company v. Lloyd's of Shelton Auto Glass, L L C, A/A/O Bruce Farlow

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 11, 2024 | Docket: 69455317

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages." § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2020). " '[A] reasonable

Pedro Barcelo v. Little Paket Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 4, 2024 | Docket: 69435419

Published

course of conduct, resulting in injury or damage.” § 768.72(2)(a), Fla. Stat. (2024). While “‘[g]ross negligence’

Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois v. Rebecca L. Heikka

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 6, 2024 | Docket: 69347200

Published

punitive damages, as is required pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2022). 2 Therefore, the

Safeco Insurance Company of Illinois v. Rebecca L. Heikka

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 6, 2024 | Docket: 69347201

Published

punitive damages, as is required pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2022). 2 Therefore, the

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Lewis Gopher, Jr.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 30, 2024 | Docket: 69324306

Published

employer or corporate liability for punitive damages. § 768.72(3), Fla. Stat. (2023). Accordingly, the circuit

Victor Herman Creech III and Kathryn Creech v. Joseph Santomassino and Michael P. Kenny, Jr.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 23, 2024 | Docket: 69301667

Published

(Fla. 4th DCA 2023) (citation omitted). Section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2020), provides:

McLane Foodservice, Inc. v. Elizabeth Wool

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 16, 2024 | Docket: 69265877

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages.” § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat.; see also Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.190(f)

TIMOTHY MERCER v. SADDLE CREEK TRANSPORTATION, INC. AND CARMEN RIVERA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 28, 2024 | Docket: 68896433

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages.” § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2018); see also Fla. R. Civ. P

PROGRESSIVE SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY v. LLOYD'S OF SHELTON AUTO GLASS, L L C, A/A/O BRUCE FARLOW

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 7, 2024 | Docket: 68407978

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages." § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2020). " '[A] reasonable

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and Philip Morris USA Inc. v. Lourdes , Jones, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Yolanda Alvarez

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 5, 2024 | Docket: 68829291

Published

to assert a claim for punitive damages under section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2022). This

Orlando Health, Inc. f/k/a Orlando Regional Healthcare System, Inc. v. Mark R. Mohan, Rohini Budhu, South Lake Hospital, Inc., Jorge L. Florin, M.D., P.A., d/b/a Mid-Florida Surgical Associates, and Karl M. Hagen, M.D.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 24, 2024 | Docket: 67811277

Published

assert application of the provisions under section 768.72(3)(a) or (b), Florida Statutes, which would

Ariel Friedler v. Faena Hotels and Residences, LLC

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 2024 | Docket: 68466348

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages.” § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2022); see Bistline v. Rogers

FAYE CRUMP v. AMERICAN MULTI-CINEMA, INC. D/B/A AMC

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 2024 | Docket: 66741695

Published

AMC’s negligence. On July 25, 2022, pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes, and Florida Rule of Civil

Giselle Gattorno and David Iglesias v. Steven Souto

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 27, 2024 | Docket: 68380020

Published

recovery of such damages,” as required by section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2021). Specifically

LoanFlight Lending, LLC v. Gerald A. Wood

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 20, 2024 | Docket: 68357692

Published

3 Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2023), provides the basis

FLORIDA INVESTMENTS UNLIMITED, INC., D/B/A TEAM STAFFING SERVICES AND DEBORAH JONES v. KATHREEN TUMMARELLO, AS PERSONAL RESPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF TINAMARIE SMITH

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 15, 2024 | Docket: 68344020

Published

tasked with being a ‘gatekeeper’ . . . .”). Section 768.72, Florida Statutes, prohibits a plaintiff from

Downtown Towing Company v. Energy-Cargo MGT, LLC

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 28, 2024 | Docket: 68154125

Published

with the predicate procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2023), before seeking punitive

Bashar M. Yatak and 52 SW 5th Ct., WHSE, LLC v. La Placita Grocery of Fort Pierce Corp. and Dilson S. Urribarri

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 14, 2024 | Docket: 68249804

Published

statutory prerequisites for punitive damages under section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2023), the rule requires

Steven M. Selz v. Lauren McKagen and Stephen Hursey

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 31, 2024 | Docket: 68209014

Published

failed to meet the requirements imposed by section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2022), to amend their complaint

Phoenix Management Services, Inc. and Adam Goldberg v. Waterchase Homeowners' Association, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 24, 2024 | Docket: 68188301

Published

requirements for punitive damages established by section 768.72, Florida Statutes. ___ So. 3d ____, 48 Fla

JOHN KNOX VILLAGE OF CENTRAL FLORIDA, INC. AND LESLY MOMPOINT, AS TO MAJESTIC OAKS v. ESTATE OF ALMA JANE LAWRENCE, BY AND THROUGH MARIAN K. CASTLEMAN, PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 12, 2024 | Docket: 67078462

Published

relevant to this appeal. Section 768.72 applies to “any civil action.” § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. It states

FLORIDA BC HOLDINGS, LLC D/B/A SYNERGY EQUIPMENT v. JAY E. REESE

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 21, 2023 | Docket: 68107551

Published

of intentional misconduct or gross negligence. § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2008). The jury reached its verdict

William Marvin Douberley v. Harold Peerenboom

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 13, 2023 | Docket: 68084211

Published

committed “intentional misconduct” as defined in section 768.72(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2013); (2) Douberley

Ebsary Foundation Company v. Thomas C. Servinksy

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 22, 2023 | Docket: 68028879

Published

entitled to recover punitive damages under section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2019), and reverse the circuit

HOSPITAL SPECIALISTS, P.A. v. KATHLEEN DEEN, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF WILLIAM ALVIN DEEN, ABDI ABBASSI, M.D., AND DIGESTIVE DISEASE CONSULTANTS, LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMANY

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 21, 2023 | Docket: 67681297

Published

engaged in the behavior described and defined in section 768.72(2) and (3), Florida Statutes (2017), as required

BRIC MCMANN INDUSTRIES INCORPORATED v. REGATTA BEACH CLUB CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 15, 2023 | Docket: 67800055

Published

So. 2d 1188, 1191 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2022), provides that a punitive

HEART OF ADOPTIONS, INC. v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 8, 2023 | Docket: 67774356

Published

restore a defendant's statutory right under section 768.72 to be free of punitive damages allegations

JUDITH LONG v. JAMES L. KROPKE and ROSE KROPKE

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 16, 2023 | Docket: 67696047

Published

conduct amounted to gross negligence under section 768.72(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2021).

SUSANNE COOK vs FLORIDA PENINSULA INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 11, 2023 | Docket: 68034347

Published

to assert a punitive damages claim. Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2022), governs a plaintiff’s

GARY I. MANHEIMER v. FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 2, 2023 | Docket: 67657796

Published

required pursuant to the plain language of section 768.72, Florida Statutes, we affirm.

University of Florida Board of Trustees v. Laurie Carmody

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jul 6, 2023 | Docket: 67561782

Published

1987), superseded by statute on other grounds, § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2021)). It “gives [an] upper court

CHAD LORD vs FEDNAT INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 2023 | Docket: 68034481

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages.” § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2021). “The claimant may move

NAPLETON'S NORTH PALM AUTO PARK, INC. v. ABIGAIL AGOSTO

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 21, 2023 | Docket: 67515880

Published

required to add a claim for punitive damages by section 768.72(3)(c), Florida Statutes (2022). We agree and

RICHARD JOHN DESANTO v. GREGG GRAHN and TERRY GRAHN

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 14, 2023 | Docket: 67499843

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages.” § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2021); see also Fla. R. Civ. P

MASOUD SHOJAEE v. ANIBAL J. DUARTE-VIERA, P.A., etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 14, 2023 | Docket: 67146607

Published

v. King, 658 So. 2d 518, 519 (Fla. 1995); see § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (“No discovery of financial worth

WERNER ENTERPRISES, INC. vs CARSON MENDEZ, WILLIAM B. STALLINGS, AND AJC LOGISTICS, LLC

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 2, 2023 | Docket: 68034526

Published

before adding punitive damages to its complaint. § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2022); see also Bistline v. Rogers

HRB TAX GROUP, INC. d/b/a H&R BLOCK d/b/a BLOCK ADVISORS v. FLORIDA INVESTIGATION BUREAU, INC. d/b/a FLORIDA INVESTIGATIONS & EXECUTIVE PROTECTION

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 17, 2023 | Docket: 67400401

Published

basis for recovery of punitive damages under section 768.72(3), Florida Statutes (2020). The underlying

MYI INTERNATIONAL, LLC v. BLUE OCEAN MIAMI, INC.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 26, 2023 | Docket: 65879424

Published

1987), superseded by statute on other grounds, § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2021)) (“Discovery of certain kinds

SE Property Holdings, LLC v. Neverve LLC

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Apr 11, 2023 | Docket: 65769688

Published

Argued: Nov 18, 2022

For example, SEPH points to section 768.72(2), titled “Plead- ing in civil actions;

GARY L. MARDER, D.O. v. ROBERTA MUELLER

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 5, 2023 | Docket: 67140868

Published

Patient failed to satisfy the requirements of section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2018). Patient filed

FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION v. GADITH SABBAH, etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 22, 2023 | Docket: 65365625

Published

“plaintiff made a ‘reasonable showing’ under section 768.72 to recover punitive damages.” Id. The lower

PIERRE RICHARD STANICLAS v. DERIC L. BOGRAN

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 8, 2023 | Docket: 66795932

Published

215 So. 3d 607, 611 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (“[Section 768.72, Florida Statutes] requires the trial court

PIERRE RICHARD STANICLAS v. ALEXANDER GAMARNIK

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 8, 2023 | Docket: 66795933

Published

215 So. 3d 607, 611 (Fla. 4th DCA 2017) (“[Section 768.72, Florida Statutes] requires the trial court

CLEVELAND CLINIC FLORIDA HEALTH SYSTEM NONPROFIT CORPORATION and CLEVELAND CLINIC FLORIDA v. ANDREA S. ORIOLO, as Personal Representative for the ESTATE OF SAVERIO SASSO

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 25, 2023 | Docket: 66757263

Published

punitive damages against a corporation pursuant to section 768.72(3)(b), Florida Statutes (2019). Appellee

PROGRESSIVE SELECT INSURANCE COMPANY f/b/a PROGRESSIVE AUTO PRO INSURANCE COMPANY v. JANELLE OBER

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 18, 2023 | Docket: 66738077

Published

So. 2d 1188, 1191 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)). Section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2009), provides “no claim

THE ESTATE OF NICHOLAS ADAM BLAKELY, BY AND THROUGH MICHELLE WILSON, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE vs STETSON UNIVERSITY, INC.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 30, 2022 | Docket: 68034873

Published

intentional misconduct or gross negligence. See § 768.72(2), Fla. Stat. (2017). In the instant case, Wilson

MARIO ABAD v. VENUS LACALAMITA

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 23, 2022 | Docket: 65879048

Published

III—gross negligence. 2 Pursuant to section 768.72(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2021), a defendant

GROVE ISLE ASSOCIATION, INC. v. JERRY M. LINDZON

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 10, 2022 | Docket: 65745124

Published

damages against a corporation pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2022), the trial court

BPI SPORTS, LLC v. FLORIDA SUPPLEMENT, LLC, etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 26, 2022 | Docket: 65635492

Published

1987), superseded by statute on other grounds, § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2021); High Five Prod., Inc. v.

AVANT DESIGN GROUP, INC., etc. v. AQUASTAR HOLDINGS, LLC, etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 12, 2022 | Docket: 65417125

Published

comply with the procedural requirements of section 768.72 of the Florida Statutes. 5 In the Amended

BULK EXPRESS TRANSPORT INC. v. LUIS ALBERTO DIAZ

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 27, 2022 | Docket: 64435975

Published

to add a count for punitive damages under section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2019). We deny the petition

KELLIANNE NASO, as Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF ALLAN DWOSKIN v. RONALD HALL, G4S SECURE SOLUTIONS (USA) INC.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 4, 2022 | Docket: 63285687

Published

’” Id. (citation omitted). Additionally, section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2017), provides:

In Re: Amendment to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 27, 2022 | Docket: 62631940

Published

concern for the privacy of financial discovery. Section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes 2. Recently

In Re: Amendment to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130

Supreme Court of Florida | Filed: Jan 6, 2022 | Docket: 61718685

Published

concern for the privacy of financial discovery. Section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes 2. Recently

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. v. UGO COLOMBO

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 24, 2021 | Docket: 61574112

Published

complied with the procedural requirements of section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2021). Colombo proffered

WILLIAM ALVAREZ AND BETHAIDA ALVAREZ v. MARK CANTOR

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 10, 2021 | Docket: 60858243

Published

complied with the procedural requirements of section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2021). The Respondent

MOSS & ASSOCIATES, LLC, etc. v. CORY LAPIN

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 27, 2021 | Docket: 60677181

Published

add a claim for punitive damages pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2021). We deny the petition

LEON MEDICAL CENTERS, INC. v. JOSE DURAN, etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 20, 2021 | Docket: 60660116

Published

amend to add a claim for punitive damages under section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2018). In determining whether

OMEGA TITLE NAPLES, L L C D/B/A DUNN TITLE v. ROGER BUTSCHKY

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 10, 2021 | Docket: 60375485

Published

The rationale for this argument begins with section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2018), which provides

HASHEM SULTAN, M.D. v. WALGREEN, CO.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 14, 2021 | Docket: 60056678

Published

profession, or office.”) (citations omitted); see also § 768.72(3), Fla. LLC v. Lopez, 308 So. 3d 961, 964 (Fla

WENDELL LOCKE v. LEVI WHITEHEAD and NICHOLA WHITEHEAD

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 23, 2021 | Docket: 60006538

Published

any punitive damage claim must comply with section 768.72 and be supported by evidence. In their brief

LUIS ROVERSI, etc. v. CONVERPACK, INC., etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 16, 2021 | Docket: 59988821

Published

to whether the procedural requirements of section 768.72 have been followed. . . . Moreover, this court

THE BENTLEY CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. v. COLLEEN BENNETT, etc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 12, 2021 | Docket: 59899774

Published

of rule 1.190(a), must requirements of section 768.72 have been followed,” including compliance with

JOYCE HARDIN, etc. v. R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 16, 2020 | Docket: 18747977

Published

“grossly negligent” within the meaning of section 768.72, Florida Statutes. While this may be true,

VITAL PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. CHERYL OHEL

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 14, 2020 | Docket: 18534799

Published

So. 3d 1261, 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013). Section 768.72, Florida Statutes, was enacted in 1986 to resolve

Mary Sowers v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 15, 2020 | Docket: 18439264

Published

intentional misconduct or gross negligence. Fla. Stat. § 768.72(2); see also Fla. Std. Jury Instr. 503.1b(1)

PUBLIX SUPER MARKETS, INC. v. MONICA OLIVARES, Individually, and as Personal Representative of the ESTATE OF ALBERTO OLIVARES and RANDOLPH SAPP

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 8, 2020 | Docket: 16667086

Published

or rights of persons exposed to such conduct.” § 768.72(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2018). The plaintiffs alleged

RANDOLPH SAPP v. MONICA OLIVARES

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 8, 2020 | Docket: 16667085

Published

damages in this wrongful death cause of action. Section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2018), allows for the

FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY v. TRICIA DOMINGUEZ, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF JUSTIN DOMINGUEZ

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 25, 2019 | Docket: 16381533

Published

contributed to the loss of the injured party. § 768.72(2)(b), (3)(c), Fla. Stat. (2013). Moreover, because

CARPENTER'S HOME ESTATES, INC. AND HMS OF LAKELAND, INC. v. SANDRA K. SANDERS, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MARY HURST CURRY

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 16, 2019 | Docket: 16338043

Published

(Fla. 1995) (holding that in the context of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1993), the punitive-damages

Teresa Taylor v. Mentor Worldwide, LLC

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Oct 8, 2019 | Docket: 16307718

Published

intentional misconduct or gross negligence.” Fla. Stat. § 768.72(2). The statute defines the terms as follows:

CARPENTER'S HOME ESTATES, INC. AND HMS OF LAKELAND, INC. v. THE ESTATE OF MARY HURST CURRY

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 12, 2019 | Docket: 15762827

Published

(Fla. 1995) (so holding in the context of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1993), the punitive-damages

THE EVENT DEPOT CORP. v. ROBERT FRANK

269 So. 3d 559

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 24, 2019 | Docket: 14988985

Published

deficient in alleging gross negligence under section 768.72(2)(b), Florida Statutes (2018). Our review

R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Ledo

274 So. 3d 416

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 10, 2019 | Docket: 14909092

Published

Soffer, considered the requirements imposed by section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2016), and held that Mrs

Melendez v. Eversole

263 So. 3d 1140

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 18, 2019 | Docket: 64703931

Published

complied with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes. We, conversely, lack "jurisdiction

Melendez v. Eversole

263 So. 3d 1140

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 18, 2019 | Docket: 64703932

Published

complied with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes. We, conversely, lack "jurisdiction

Juan Ricardo Jackson Melendez and Jessica Santo Rivera v. Donald Deland Eversole and Michele Marie Eversole, his wife

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 18, 2019 | Docket: 14556915

Published

complied with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes. We, conversely, lack “jurisdiction

Int'l Sec. Mgmt. Grp., Inc. v. Rolland

271 So. 3d 33

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 2018 | Docket: 64713518

Published

for punitive damages against ISMG pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2015).8 A. Qualified Privilege

Int'l Sec. Mgmt. Grp., Inc. v. Rolland

271 So. 3d 33

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 2018 | Docket: 64713518

Published

for punitive damages against ISMG pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2015).8 A. Qualified Privilege

Int'l Sec. Mgmt. Grp., Inc. v. Rolland

271 So. 3d 33

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 28, 2018 | Docket: 64713517

Published

for punitive damages against ISMG pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2015).8 A. Qualified Privilege

American Heritage Life Insurance Company v. Norma Jo Smith and DGT, Inc.

263 So. 3d 133

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 13, 2018 | Docket: 8168699

Published

complied with the procedural requirements in section 768.72, Florida Statutes; we do not have jurisdiction

UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY v. RIVERSIDE MEDICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.

252 So. 3d 771

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 12, 2018 | Docket: 7863691

Published

(Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (en banc) (stating that section 768.72, Florida Statutes creates “a positive legal

Robins v. Colombo

253 So. 3d 94

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 8, 2018 | Docket: 7619134

Published

assert a claim for punitive damages pursuant to section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2018). That subsection

Johnson v. New Destiny Christian Ctr. Church, Inc.

318 F. Supp. 3d 1328

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 31, 2018 | Docket: 64319397

Published

997-98 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (citing Fla. Stat. § 768.72(2) (2009) and Humana Health Ins. Co. of Fla.,

Castillo v. Costco Wholesale Corp.

240 So. 3d 88

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 21, 2018 | Docket: 6311537

Published

and no motion to add such a claim pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2012), was pending when

Worth v. Estate

241 So. 3d 882

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 7, 2018 | Docket: 64677059

Published

i.e., the procedural standards set forth in section 768.72 of the Florida Statutes. Petitions denied.

Worth v. the Estate of Idelle Stern

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 7, 2018 | Docket: 6297803

Published

e., the procedural standards set forth in section 768.72 of the Florida Statutes. Petitions denied

R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company v. Andy R. Allen Sr., as Personal Rep. etc.

228 So. 3d 684, 2017 WL 4654900

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 18, 2017 | Docket: 6182889

Published

99-225, section 22, Laws of Florida, amended section 768.72(2)(b), Florida Statutes, to require a “conscious

Kraz, LLC v. Branch Banking & Trust Co. (In re Kraz, LLC)

570 B.R. 389, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 33, 2017 Bankr. LEXIS 1066

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 18, 2017 | Docket: 65789874

Published

published or communicated to a third party). . § 768.72(2), Fla. Stat. . Ferguson Transp., Inc. v. N

Rodriguez v. Copeland

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 6, 2017 | Docket: 4586774

Published

damages in a civil action are enumerated in section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2015), and Florida Rule

Hernando HMA, LLC v. Erwin

208 So. 3d 848, 2017 WL 456911, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 1256

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 3, 2017 | Docket: 4583362

Published

version of the punitive damages statute, see § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1999), which has since been amended

Faith Freight Forwarding Corp. v. Anias

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 7, 2016 | Docket: 4419704

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of such damages.” § 768.72(1), Fla. Stat. (2014). We remand for a new trial

Brown v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.

113 F. Supp. 3d 1233, 2015 WL 3796282, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 79980

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jun 18, 2015 | Docket: 64302768

Published

intentional misconduct or gross negligence.” Fla. Stat. § 768.72(2); Myers v. Central Florida Investments, Inc

Montoya v. PNC Bank, N.A.

94 F. Supp. 3d 1293, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 35792, 2015 WL 1311482

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Mar 23, 2015 | Docket: 64301174

Published

may also seek punitive damages. See Fla. Stat. § 768.72. Accordingly, a RICO claim — even with its treble

Doolittle v. Shumer

152 So. 3d 779, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 19785, 2014 WL 6829845

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 5, 2014 | Docket: 60244989

Published

Petitioner then filed a motion pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2013), for leave to amend

Winter Haven Hospital, Inc. v. Liles

148 So. 3d 507, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 15616, 2014 WL 5002115

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 8, 2014 | Docket: 1433141

Published

actions independent of Dr. Gordon. See § 768.72(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2004); Chrysler Corp

STO Corp., a foreign corporation v. Greenhut Construction Company, etc.

146 So. 3d 534, 2014 WL 4629200

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 22, 2014 | Docket: 1310199

Published

1987), super-ceded by statute on other grounds, § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1989), [a] non-final order for

SCI Funeral Services of Florida, Inc. v. Muñoz

146 So. 3d 1273, 2014 WL 4628520

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 17, 2014 | Docket: 1255693

Published

categories of corporate involvement established in section 768.72(3)(a), (b), or (c), as required to subject

Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Dolgencorp, LLC

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Mar 5, 2014 | Docket: 2902227

Published

intentional misconduct or gross negligence.” Fla. Stat. § 768.72(2). “‘Intentional misconduct’ means that the

Leason v. Farese

133 So. 3d 1157, 2014 WL 620306, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 2188

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 19, 2014 | Docket: 60238702

Published

complaint for fraudulent misrepresentation. See § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2013). We deny the petition and write

Black v. Kerzner International Holdings Ltd.

958 F. Supp. 2d 1347, 2013 WL 3989064, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 111719

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 30, 2013 | Docket: 65992784

Published

1202, 1220 (11th Cir.2010) (quoting Fla. Stat. § 768.72(2)). “In order to demonstrate intentional misconduct

Mikesell v. FIA Card Services, N.A.

936 F. Supp. 2d 1327, 2013 WL 1365739, 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 49008

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 4, 2013 | Docket: 65990229

Published

basis for recovery of such damages." Fla. Stat. § 768.72(1). Kraft Gen. Foods, Inc. v. Rosenblum, 635 So

Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Big Lots Stores, Inc.

886 F. Supp. 2d 1326, 2012 WL 3292001, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 113691

District Court, S.D. Florida | Filed: Aug 13, 2012 | Docket: 65984332

Published

intentional misconduct or gross negligence.” Fla Stat. § 768.72(2). “ ‘Intentional misconduct’ means that the

Bushong v. Peel

85 So. 3d 511, 2012 WL 1020187, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 4758

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 28, 2012 | Docket: 2415986

Published

1987), superseded by statute on other grounds, § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1989), as stated in Williams v. Oken

Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd. v. Eidissen

69 So. 3d 1019, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 14536, 2011 WL 4056117

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 14, 2011 | Docket: 2570786

Published

sufficiency of eviden-tiary determinations under section 768.72 of the Florida Statutes); Solis v. Calvo, 689

Meininger v. Florida Pediatric Associates, LLC (In Re Johnson)

453 B.R. 433, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 115, 2011 Bankr. LEXIS 2636, 2011 WL 2784157

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Jul 13, 2011 | Docket: 2057096

Published

Bankruptcy Judge. Introduction The provision in section 768.72, Florida Statutes, that no claim for punitive

Jensen v. Cardillo, Keith & Bonaquist, P.A. (In Re Leli)

420 B.R. 568, 22 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. B 265, 2009 Bankr. LEXIS 3955, 2009 WL 4842833

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Dec 10, 2009 | Docket: 1764541

Published

punitive damages under Florida law is very high. Section 768.72(2) of the Florida Statute provides: (2) A defendant

STOCK DEVELOPMENT, LLC v. Ulrich

7 So. 3d 582, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1804, 2009 WL 530589

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 4, 2009 | Docket: 2541203

Published

conducted the evidentiary inquiry required by section 768.72, Florida Statutes, but not so broad as to encompass

Cradle to Crayons Childcare Center, Inc. v. Ramos

999 So. 2d 1090, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 78, 2009 WL 36481

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 8, 2009 | Docket: 64857758

Published

seek punitive damages without complying with section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2007). Because the appellants

Espirito Santo Bank v. Rego

990 So. 2d 1088, 2007 WL 1062521

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 17, 2008 | Docket: 1687990

Published

COMPLAINT TO INCLUDE PUNITIVE DAMAGES Under section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2005), a plaintiff is required

Burgess v. PFIZER, INC.

990 So. 2d 1140, 2008 WL 4057910

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 3, 2008 | Docket: 1688246

Published

establish a reasonable evidentiary basis. See § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2005). The trial court denied leave

Kostoff v. Fleet Securities, Inc.

506 F. Supp. 2d 1150, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25444, 2007 WL 1064217

District Court, M.D. Florida | Filed: Apr 5, 2007 | Docket: 1242940

Published

is unavailing.[8] Pursuant to Florida Statute, § 768.72 a "defendant may be held liable for punitive damages

Mobil Corp. v. Mallia

933 So. 2d 613, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 10692

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 28, 2006 | Docket: 64845739

Published

lends any support for our advisory opinion. Section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1993), did not attempt to

Reinoso v. Fuentes

932 So. 2d 536, 2006 WL 1688014

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 21, 2006 | Docket: 1285651

Published

compliance with the procedures outlined in section 768.72 and the Simeon decision. The plaintiffs argue

Browne v. Benedict

910 So. 2d 318, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 13862, 2005 WL 2105374

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Sep 2, 2005 | Docket: 64840294

Published

complied with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2004), in allowing an amendment

M.S. v. Nova Southeastern University Inc.

881 So. 2d 614, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 10836

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jul 21, 2004 | Docket: 64832431

Published

to adhere to the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2002). See generally Globe

Parker, Landerman & Parker, P.A. v. Riccard

871 So. 2d 1043, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 6439, 2004 WL 1057782

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 7, 2004 | Docket: 64830137

Published

allowed the punitive damages claim to be added. Section 768.72(1), Florida Statutes (2003), creates a substantive

Noack v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Florida, Inc.

872 So. 2d 370, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 5817, 2004 WL 893936

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 28, 2004 | Docket: 64830198

Published

court followed the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes, in disposing of petitioners’

Surrey Place of Ocala v. Goodwin

861 So. 2d 1291, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 73, 2004 WL 40570

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jan 9, 2004 | Docket: 64827234

Published

respondent’s punitive damage proffer. Under section 768.72, Florida Statutes, the trial judge was charged

Estate of Esterline v. Avante At Leesburg, Inc.

845 So. 2d 1028, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 7990, 2003 WL 21240042

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 30, 2003 | Docket: 64822958

Published

filed a motion, later amended, pursuant to section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1999), seeking to assert

Atlantic Exterminating of North Florida, Inc. v. Alvarez

815 So. 2d 754, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6113, 2002 WL 857343

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 7, 2002 | Docket: 64814873

Published

Hinn, 705 So.2d 1010 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); section 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2000). BOOTH, MINER and KAHN,

Massey Services, Inc. v. Brown

801 So. 2d 307, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 17624, 2001 WL 1589192

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 14, 2001 | Docket: 64810668

Published

that a reasonable basis for the claim exists. See § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1999). In Globe Newspaper Co. v.

Delta Health Group, Inc. v. Jackson

798 So. 2d 857, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 15556, 2001 WL 1346419

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 2, 2001 | Docket: 64809843

Published

conformed with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (2001), in allowing a punitive

Orlando Jewelers, Mfg., Inc. v. Foster

790 So. 2d 1266, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 11371, 2001 WL 908817

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 10, 2001 | Docket: 64807295

Published

conformed with the procedural requirements of section 768.72 in allowing a punitive damage claim, but not

Sloan v. Toler

778 So. 2d 1094, 2001 WL 246008

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 14, 2001 | Docket: 1687030

Published

made the factual *1095 showing required by section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1999), in order to allow

Porter v. Ogden, Newell & Welch

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Feb 15, 2001 | Docket: 396449

Published

sought punitive damages pursuant to Florida Stat. § 768.72. On cross-motions for summary judgment, the district

Chester Smith v. GTE Corporation

236 F.3d 1292, 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 59, 2001 WL 10395

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jan 4, 2001 | Docket: 212561

Published

properly pleaded in accordance with Fla. Stat. § 768.72, the court concluded that the plaintiff’s class

Chester Smith v. GTE Corporation

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Jan 4, 2001 | Docket: 396382

Published

been properly pled in accordance with Fla. Stat. § 768.72, the court concluded that the plaintiff’s class

Rex T. Morrison v. Allstate Indemnity Co.

228 F.3d 1255

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 26, 2000 | Docket: 396092

Published

time the complaint was filed, Florida Statute § 768.72 prohibited a plaintiff from pleading punitive

Rex T. Morrison v. Allstate Indemnity Co.

228 F.3d 1255, 2000 U.S. App. LEXIS 23752

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Sep 26, 2000 | Docket: 396102

Published

time the complaint was filed, Florida Statute § 768.72 prohibited a plaintiff from pleading punitive

Atlantic Security Bank v. Adiler S.A.

760 So. 2d 258, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 6840, 2000 WL 726788

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 7, 2000 | Docket: 64797951

Published

justifiable reason for this motion coming mid trial. Section 768.72 Florida Statutes (1999)provides in part: Pleading

Cohen v. Office Depot, Inc.

184 F.3d 1292

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | Filed: Aug 17, 1999 | Docket: 395464

Published

opinion in this case, we held that Florida Statute § 768.72 conflicts with and must yield to the “short and

Fostock v. Lampasone

711 So. 2d 1154, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2150, 1998 WL 88312

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 4, 1998 | Docket: 64781203

Published

to comply with the proce-' dure set out by section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1996), was fundamental error

Sunbelt Distributors, Inc. v. Kleinrichert

702 So. 2d 644, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 14518, 1997 WL 795685

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Dec 31, 1997 | Docket: 64777318

Published

basis for such damages exists as required by section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1995). The trial court denied

Shell v. Strachan

700 So. 2d 175, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11560, 1997 WL 633951

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 15, 1997 | Docket: 64776132

Published

to make the evidentiary showing required by section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1995). AFFIRMED IN PART

Allstate Insurance Co. v. American Southern Home Insurance Co.

680 So. 2d 1112

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Oct 11, 1996 | Docket: 64768127

Published

in light of the procedural requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes, which requires a trial court

Waterfront Builders, Inc. v. DeGirolarmo

675 So. 2d 265, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 6775, 1996 WL 346999

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 26, 1996 | Docket: 64765295

Published

to strike the claim for punitive damages. See § 768.72, Fla.Stat. (1996); Keller Indus., Inc. v. Kennedy

Eugene J. Strasser, M.D., P.A. v. Bose Yalamanchi, M.D., P.A.

677 So. 2d 22, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 6428, 1996 WL 332953

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 19, 1996 | Docket: 64766218

Published

evidence in the record or proffered by the claimant.” § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (1995). In Globe Newspaper Co. v.

Church of Scientology Flag Service v. Williams

671 So. 2d 840, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3707, 1996 WL 168910

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Apr 12, 1996 | Docket: 64763874

Published

it was not properly asserted as required by section 768.72, Florida Statutes. Also, objections to the

Keller Industries, Inc. v. Kennedy

668 So. 2d 328, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 1524, 1996 WL 72221

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Feb 21, 1996 | Docket: 64762472

Published

basis for such damages exists as required by section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1993). See Mayer v. Frank

Jim Peacock Dodge, Inc. v. Russell

656 So. 2d 247, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6271, 1995 WL 340404

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Jun 9, 1995 | Docket: 64757145

Published

punitive damages when there is non-compliance with section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1993). My disagreement adopted

Lucas v. Tyson

644 So. 2d 616, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 11148, 1994 WL 645477

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Nov 18, 1994 | Docket: 64751825

Published

Lennon, 532 So.2d 1328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1991). ZEHMER, C.J., and

Torcise v. Homestead Properties

622 So. 2d 637, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 9057, 1993 WL 321576

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 24, 1993 | Docket: 64698186

Published

reasonable basis for recovery of [punitive] damages.” § 768.72, Fla.Stat. (1991). See Key West *638Convalescent

Chrysler Corp. v. Pumphrey

622 So. 2d 1164, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 8657, 1993 WL 317097

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Aug 23, 1993 | Docket: 64698264

Published

supported *1165a claim for punitive damages. See, § 768.-72, Fla.Stat. (1989). Accordingly, the petition for

Paramount Health & Fitness, Inc. v. R.W. Tansill Construction Co.

621 So. 2d 473, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 5475, 1993 WL 164881

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 19, 1993 | Docket: 64697639

Published

financial worth in punitive damage cases, because section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1989), unequivocally prohibits

Meadowbrook Health Care Services of Florida, Inc. v. Acosta

617 So. 2d 1104, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 4972, 1993 WL 139757

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: May 4, 1993 | Docket: 64696114

Published

denied. The plaintiff met the requirements of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1991), by producing record

Dolphin Cove Ass'n v. Square D. Co.

616 So. 2d 553, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 3651, 1993 WL 95591

District Court of Appeal of Florida | Filed: Mar 31, 1993 | Docket: 64695389

Published

liability action arose before the effective date of section 768.72, Florida Statutes (1986), which requires an