Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): 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. Reviewing the sections at issue, we find no clear-cut reason why the two should not be read in harmony. See State ex rel. School Bd. v. Department of Educ., 317 So.2d 68 ( ot to be subjected to financial worth discovery until the court makes an affirmative finding that there is a reasonable evidentiary basis for a punitive damages claim. See Potter v. S.A.K. Dev. Corp., 678 So.2d 472 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996) (<HOLDING>) Accordingly, the instant petition is granted 
 Holding statements: (A) holding punitive damages claims must be stricken absent a reasonable evidentiary basis for their award (B) holding that evidence of a defendants financial condition is a prerequisite to an award of punitive damages (C) holding a court may not award punitive damages (D) holding without discussion of the punitive damages issue that judgment for embezzlement which included actual and punitive damages was nondischargeable (E) holding what section 76872 requires is that a plaintiff who has pleaded punitive damages must offer a reasonable evidentiary basis for punitive damages and obtain an order authorizing the maintenance of the punitive damage claim as a predicate to conducting discovery of a defendants financial worth
Output (English): holding without discussion of the punitive damages issue that judgment for embezzlement which included actual and punitive damages was nondischargeable