IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

MARCELLE ANN ANGALL-LEONCE 

and ROMANUS SYLVESTER LEONCE, 

Husband and Wife,

CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-00127-AW-GRJ

Plaintiff,

v.

ON POINT TRANSPORT, INC. and 

JOSEPH MISATULI LEIA, 

Defendants.

________________________________/

JOINT PRETRIAL STIPULATION

COME NOW, the parties, Plaintiff MARCELLE ANN ANGALL-LEONCE 

AND ROMANUS SYLVESTER LEONCE, HUSBAND AND WIFE and 

Defendants, ON POINT TRANSPORT, INC. AND JOSEPH MISATULI LEIA, by 

and through their undersigned counsel and hereby submit this Joint Pretrial 

Stipulation of the Parties as follows and state:

Background

1. On February 25, 2021, the Court entered the Order for Pretrial 

Conference setting the Pretrial Conference for March 29, 2021. (Doc 32). 

2. Pursuant to ⁋2 of the Court’s Order for Pretrial Conference, the parties 

are filing this Joint Pretrial Stipulation stating that the exhibit exchange and 
admissibility attorney conference took place on March 8, 2021, and the Parties 

stipulate as follows: 

a. The basis of federal jurisdiction.

This is a personal injury lawsuit involving a crash between a tractor-trailer

and a four (4)-door minivan, which occurred on highway I-75 in Micanopy, Marion 

County, Florida on July 26, 2015. Plaintiff’s damages exceed $75,000 and pursuant 

to 28 U.S.C. Section 1332(a)(l), federal district courts have original jurisdiction of 

all civil actions where the matter in controversy exceeds $75,000 in value and is 

between citizens of different states. The Plaintiffs are citizens of the State of Georgia 

and the Defendants are citizens of the State of California. Accordingly, complete 

diversity of citizenship is present.

b. A concise statement of the nature of the case.

This is a personal injury lawsuit involving a crash between a tractor-trailer

and a four (4)-door minivan, which occurred on highway I-75 in Marion County, 

Florida on July 26, 2015. Liability, causation and damages are disputed and remain 

for trial.

c. A brief general statement of each party’s case.

Plaintiffs’ statement: On or about July 26, 2015, Defendant, JOSEPH 

MISATULI LEIA, negligently operated the motor vehicle owned by Defendant, ON 

POINT TRANSPORT, INC., to wit: a Semi Tractor Trailer on Interstate 75

northbound at MM372, so that it struck the vehicle that Plaintiff, ROMANUS 

SYLVESTER LEONCE, was driving, and Plaintiff, MARCELLE ANN ANGALLLEONCE, was the passenger. 

Defense statement: The Defendants deny any negligence on the part of Joseph 

Misatuli Leia. Rather, they contend that the subject accident was the result of an 

unforeseeable, sudden emergent situation that presented itself to Mr. Leia as he 

crested a hill on I-75 North during heavy rain and rather poor visibility. 

Consequently, the Defendants maintain that Mr. Leia acted appropriately at all times 

and drove his tractor-trailer in accordance with industry standards. The Defendants 

also contend that Plaintiff, Marcelle Ann Angall-Leonce did not sustain a permanent 

injury within a degree of reasonable medical probability. 
d. A List of all exhibits to be offered at the trial, noting any 

objections and the grounds for each objection. (Any objections 

not listed will be deemed waived.

See Plaintiff’s Disclosure of Exhibits to be offered at trial, noting objections 

as Exhibit “1”.

See Defendants’ Exhibit List attached hereto, noting objections as Exhibit 

“2”.

e. A list of all witnesses, including rebuttal and expert, each party

intends to call. (Witness addresses must be provided to opposing 

counsel but must not be included in the pretrial stipulation.) 

Expert witnesses must be labeled as expert witnesses.

See List of Plaintiff’s Witnesses, Including Rebuttal and Expert attached 

hereto as Plaintiff’s Rule 26(A)(3) Pretrial Disclosures as Exhibit “3”.

See Defendants’ Witness List attached hereto as Exhibit “4”.

f. A concise statement of those facts that are admitted and will

require no proof at trial, together with any reservations

directed to such admissions.

The motor vehicle accident which is the subject of this lawsuit occurred on 

July 26, 2015 on I-75 North in Micanopy, Marion, County, Florida.

Plaintiff, Romanus Sylvester Leonce was driving a Honda Odyssey van, in 

which his wife, Marcelle Ann Angall-Leonce, was seated as a front seat passenger.

Defendant Joseph Misatuli Leia was driving a 2010 Semi Tractor Trailer 

owned by Defendant On Point Transport, Inc. at the time of the subject accident.

Defendant Joseph Misatuli Leia was hauling a 2006 53-foot Wabash 

refrigerated trailer, which was empty at the time of the subject accident. 

g. A concise statement of those issues of law upon which there is

agreement.
Florida State common law substantive law applies, while the Federal Rules of 

Evidence and Civil Procedure apply. 

h. A concise statement of those issues of fact that remain to be

litigated.

The negligence of Defendant Joseph Misatuli Leia; the damages, if any, 

sustained by the Plaintiffs which were legally and proximately caused by the subject 

accident; and whether or not Plaintiff Marcelle Ann Angall-Leonce sustained a 

permanent injury within a degree of reasonable medical probability as a result of the 

subject accident. 

i. A concise statement of those issues of law that remain for the

court’s resolution.

Those issues raised in the Motions previously filed and the following specific 

objections to exhibits: 

1. Defense objects to the “plan/recommendations” paragraph on page 2 of the 

medical record from Florida Surgery Consultants, Dr. Rodas; grounds 

narrative CME report, prepared solely for litigation purposes. 

2. Defendant objects to plaintiff’s exhibit J2 Advent Health Sunbelt systems 

records; grounds relevance. Plaintiff’s response – they are relevant as a 

hospital admission for headaches following accident.

3. Defendant objects to plaintiff’s exhibit P, the repair estimate for plaintiff’s 

vehicle on relevance grounds; plaintiff’s response – shows the nature and 

extent of property damage.

4. Defense objects to plaintiff’s exhibit P3, photographs of the Leonce family 

before and after accident; grounds for objection is predicate and relevance; 

plaintiff’s response- will authenticate and show relevance at Trial.

5. Defense objects to plaintiff’s exhibit P4, video of roadway in area of 

accident; defense objects on grounds on predicate and foundation; 

plaintiff’s response – will authenticate at Trial.

6. Defense objects to plaintiff’s exhibit P5, photos of I75 roadway in area of 

accident; defense objects on foundation and predicate grounds; plaintiff’s 

response – will authenticate at Trial. 

7. Defense objects to exhibit T, the neuropsychological evaluation by Dr. 

Arias on grounds of predicate and foundation; plaintiff’s response – this is 

a record made in the regular course of business, it is the primary subject of 

plaintiff’s memorandum of law in response to defendants motion to 

exclude evidence of social security disability determination.
8. Defense objects to plaintiff’s exhibit X, a medical bill summary on grounds 

of foundation and predicate; plaintiff’s response – predicate will be shown 

at Trial. 

9. Plaintiff objects to defendant’s exhibit 32 photographs on grounds of lack 

of authentication. Will be authenticated at the trial.

10.Plaintiff objects to defendant’s witness, Brian Fugate, EMT, as he was 

never listed as a witness and this is a Rule 26 violation. 

11.Plaintiff objects to defendant’s witness, John Klubenspies, DC, as he was 

never listed as a witness or treating physician and this is a Rule 26 

violation. 

12.Plaintiff objects to defendant’s witness, Ivo Tremont, MD, as he was never 

listed as a witness or treating physician and this is a Rule 26 violation. 

j. A concise statement of any disagreement as to the application of

rules of evidence or of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

There is no disagreement between the parties as to the applicability of either 

the Federal Rules of Evidence or Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

k. A list of all motions or other matters that require court action.

Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine regarding the exclusion of Dr. Steven Bailey’s 

opinions regarding lack of continuing brain symptomotalogy based on Daubert’s 

grounds. 

Plaintiff’s Motion to Allow Expert Guntharp to Testify in the Case in Chief.

Defendants’ Motion in Limine regarding evidence of Social Security 

Disability Insurance Determination and Memo of Law.

Plaintiff’s Response to Defendants’ Motion in Limine regarding evidence of 

Social Security Disability Insurance Determination and Memo of Law regarding Dr. 

Arias Evaluation Report.

If certain witnesses are unavailable and need to have their depositions read. It 

is possible that some objections will require rulings by the court. 

l. A statement whether this is now a jury or a non-jury case.
This is now a jury case. 

m. Counsel’s respective estimates of the length of the trial.

The Parties estimate that the trial could be concluded within five (5) to seven 

(7) days. 

SIGNATURE OF COUNSEL FOR ALL PARTIES

Respectfully submitted by electronic filing, this 22nd day of March, 2021. 

Respectfully submitted,

FINE, FARKASH & 

PARLAPIANO, P.A.

 /S/ JACK J. FINE 

JACK J. FINE, ESQ.

Florida Bar Number: 223700

622 Northeast First Street

Gainesville, Florida 32601

Telephone: 352-376-6046

Facsimile: 877-272-9101

Attorney for Plaintiffs

Primary Email: 

jfine@ffplaw.com

Secondary Email:

jduchaj@ffplaw.com

FERNANDEZ TRIAL LAWYERS, 

PA

 /S/ JOHN M. HOWELL, ESQ. 

ELLIS T. ‘E.T.’ FERNANDEZ, 

ESQ.

Florida Bar No.: 371556

JOHN MOFFITT HOWELL, ESQ.

Florida Bar No.: 243027

8780-200 Perimeter Park Court

Jacksonville, FL 32216

Telephone: 904-398-8088

Facsimile: 904-398-0332

Attorney for Defendants

Primary Email: 

Pleadings@Fernandeztl.com

Secondary Emails:

ET@Fernandeztl.com;

JHowell@Fernandeztl.com; 

KLang-Thorbs@Fernandeztl.com

 
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on MARCH 22, 2021, I electronically filed the foregoing 

with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing 

document is being served this day on all counsel of record or pro se parties identified 

on the attached Service List in the manner specified, via transmission of Notices of 

Electronic Filing generated by the CM/ECF or in some other authorized manner for 

those counsel or parties who are not authorized to receive electronically Notices of 

Electronic Filing. 

FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.

BY: /S/JACK J. FINE _____________________

 JACK J. FINE, ESQUIRE

 Attorney for Plaintiff

 Florida Bar Number: 223700
SERVICE LIST

MARCELLE ANN ANGALL-LEONCE and ROMANUS SYLVESTER 

LEONCE vs. ON POINT TRANSPORT, INC. AND JOSEPH MISATULI LEIA

Case No.: 1:20-cv-00127-AW-GRJ

United States District Court, Southern District of Florida

John Moffitt Howell, Esq. 

pleadings@fernandeztl.com

jhowell@fernandeztl.com

Fernandez Trial Lawyers, PA

8780-200 Perimeter Park Court

Jacksonville, FL 32216 

Attorney for Defendants

Jack J. Fine, Esquire

jfine@ffplaw.com

jduchaj@ffplaw.com

FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.

622 Northeast First Street

Gainesville, Florida 32601

Attorneys for Plaintiff










UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

MARCELLE ANN ANGALL-LEONCE 

and ROMANUS SYLVESTER LEONCE,

Plaintiffs,

v. CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-127-AW-GRJ

ON POINT TRANSPORT, INC., AND _____ Evidentiary

JOSEPH MISATULI LEIA __X__ Trial

_____ Other

Defendants.

/

DEFENDANTS’ EXHIBIT LIST

Exhibit Date

Identified

Date

Admitted Witness

Plaintiff’s

Objection(s) Description

A. Records, etc., from 

Adventhealth Orlando

B. Records, etc., from 

AICA Orthopedics

C.

Objection: 

Relevance 

Records, etc., from 

Altamonte Medical 

Associates

D.

Records, etc., from 

AMR Rural/Metro 

Ambulance-Orlando

E.

Records, etc., from 

American Academy of 

Nurse Practitioners 

F.

Records, etc., from 

Christ The King 

Medical Center

G. Records, etc., from 

Erlanger East Hospital

H.

Records, etc., from 

Florida Surgery 

Consultants

I.

Records, etc., from 

Gwinnett County Fire 

& Emergency Services
Case Number: 1:20-cv-127-AW-GRJ Page 2 of 5 Pages

EXHIBIT LIST – CONTINUATION SHEET

Exhibit

No.

Date

Identified

Date

Admitted Witness

Plaintiff’s

Objection(s) Description

J.

Records, etc., from 

Gwinnett Medical 

Center

K.

Records, etc., from 

Headache and 

Neurological 

Treatment Institute

L.

Records, etc., from 

Loganville Family 

Medicine

M.

Records, etc., from 

Marion County Fire 

Rescue

N.

Records, etc., from 

Masson Spine 

Institute

O.

Records, etc., from 

Nadia Sadek M.D.

P.

Records, etc., from 

NOC Physicians 

Associates

Q.

Records, etc., from 

Northside Hospital -

Employment

R. Records, etc., from 

Orlando Health, Inc. 

S.

Records, etc., from 

Physiotherapy 

Associates

T.

Records, etc., from 

Resurgens 

Orthopaedics

U. Records, etc., from 

SimonMed

V.

Records, etc., from 

Southern Adventist 

University
Case Number: 1:20-cv-127-AW-GRJ Page 3 of 5 Pages

EXHIBIT LIST – CONTINUATION SHEET

Exhibit

No.

Date

Identified

Date

Admitted Witness Objection Description

W.

Records, etc., from 

Stand Up MRI of 

Orlando

X. Records, etc., from 

TeleMed America

Y.

Records, etc., from 

Tru Health - West 

Orange Wellness & 

Injury Center

Z.

Records, etc., from UF 

Health Shands -

Gainesville

AA.

Objection: 

Relevance 

Marcelle AngallLeonce Answers To 

Interrogatories

BB.

Objection: 

Relevance 

Recorded statement of 

Marcelle AngallLeonce

CC.

Records, etc., from 

AdventHealth 

Altamonte Springs 

(Romanus)

DD.

Records, etc., from 

Loganville Family 

Medicine (Romanus)

EE.

Records, etc., from UF 

Shands Hospital 

(Romanus)

FF.

Romanus Leonce 

Answers to 

Interrogatories 

GG. Recorded statement of 

Romanus Leonce

HH. Photographs 

Any and all pleadings and other papers filed by any party in this case to the extent 

Defendants do not object to same.
Depositions, exhibits to any depositions and videos of depositions related to this action to 

the extent Defendants do not object to same.

Demonstrative evidence necessary for any expert opinion to the extent Defendants do not 

object to same.

Blowups and enlargements of exhibits.

Demonstrative aids (diagrams, charts, maps, applicable statutes and rules).

Documents and materials produced by any party during the course of discovery in this 

case to the extent Defendants do not object to same.

All exhibits listed by Plaintiff to the extent Defendants do not object to same.

Impeachment and rebuttal documents to the extent Defendants do not object to same.

All diagrams and drawings of the scene of the accident to the extent Defendants do not 

object to same.

All statements of witnesses to the accident to the extent Defendants do not object to 

same.

All video recordings relative to this incident and accident scene to the extent Defendants 

do not object to same.

The foregoing represents Defendants list of exhibits it currently intend to utilize at trial. 

Defendants reserve the right to disclose additional documents/imaging as responses to Subpoena 

to Produce Documents, Information, or Objects or to Permit Inspection of Premises in a Civil 

Action come in, and upon proper notice to the parties.
▪ FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.▪

622 NE First Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 ▪ TEL #(352) 372-7777 ▪ FAX #(877) 272-9101 

Page 1 of 12

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

MARCELLE ANN ANGALL-LEONCE 

and ROMANUS SYLVESTER LEONCE, 

Husband and Wife,

CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-00127-AW-GRJ

Plaintiff,

v.

ON POINT TRANSPORT, INC. and 

JOSEPH MISATULI LEIA, 

Defendants.

________________________________/

PLAINTIFF’S RULE 26(a)(3) PRETRIAL DISCLOSURES

Pursuant to Rule 3.06 of the Local Rules of the United States District Court for the 

Middle District of Florida, Rule 26(a)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and the Order 

for Pretrial Conference entered February 25, 2021 [DOC 32], Plaintiff, MARCELLE ANN 

ANGALL-LEONCE and ROMANUS SYLVESTER LEONCE, (“Plaintiff”), and hereby make 

the following pretrial disclosures: 

I. RULE 26(a)(3)(A): IDENTIFICATION OF WITNESSES

Witnesses Plaintiff’s Expect to Present

1. CHRISTOPHER M. LEBER, MD, FAAPMR, CLCP *EXPERT*

Physicians Life Care Planning 

SIMED Spine and Neurosurgery

4343 W. Newberry Road

Gainesville, FL 32607

Telephone: 866-888-7352

2. Joyce Eastridge, M.B.A. *EXPERT*

Economist, Inc

600 S. Magnolia Avenue, Suite 100

Tampa, FL 33606

Telephone: 813-280-2935
▪ FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.▪

622 NE First Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 ▪ TEL #(352) 372-7777 ▪ FAX #(877) 272-9101 

Page 2 of 12

3. Lisa Hellier, MS, CRC, CVE, CCM, CLCP *EXPERT*

Rehabilitation Consultant

Spruance & Associates, Inc./ Disability Management

4604 Atlantic Blvd., Suite 18

Jacksonville, FL 32207

Telephone: 904-399-5357 

4. Marc Irwin Sharfman, MD, PA *EXPERT*

Headache & Neuro Treatment Institute

2137 W. SR 434

Longwood, FL 32779

407-644-6079 and 407-644-3737

5. Treating physician

Dr. Marc Irwin Sharfman, M.D., P.A. (407) 644-3737

Board Certified Neurologist

Records Custodian and/or Representative of 

Headache and Neurological Treatment Institute

2137 W. State Road 434

Longwood, FL 32779 

Medical Treatment: physical therapy, vestibular therapy, cognitive behavioral 

therapy (CBT), and other tests like EEG, EMG and others

6. Treating physician

Dr. Robert Ostheim, DC (407) 877-7117

Records Custodian and/or Representative of 

TruHealth, LLC/West Orange Wellness & Injury Center

288 Moore Road

Ocoee, Florida 34761

7. Dr. Andrew Akerman, MD (407) 629-7160 

Records Custodian and/or Representative of 

SimonMed Imaging / MRI SimonMed Florida Winter Park (location of MRI) 

1110 W. Fairbanks Ave.

Winter Park, FL 32789 

407-629-7160 / 888-685-3907 (billing)

MRI diagnostic testing/Radiologist and *REBUTTAL EXPERT*

8. MARCELLE ANN ANGALL-LEONCE

c/o Jack Fine, Esquire

Fine, Farkash & Parlapiano, P.A. 

622 NE First Street

Gainesville, FL 32601

(352) 372-7777

Plaintiff has knowledge and information about underlying claim as to liability, 

injuries and damages.
▪ FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.▪

622 NE First Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 ▪ TEL #(352) 372-7777 ▪ FAX #(877) 272-9101 

Page 3 of 12

5. ROMANUS SYLVESTER LEONCE 

c/o Jack Fine, Esquire

Fine, Farkash & Parlapiano, P.A. 

622 NE First Street

Gainesville, FL 32601

(352) 372-7777

Plaintiff has knowledge and information about underlying claim as to liability, 

injuries and damages.

6. GABRIELLE LEONCE-MENDEZ

c/o Jack Fine, Esquire

Fine, Farkash & Parlapiano, P.A. 

622 NE First Street

Gainesville, FL 32601

(352) 372-7777

Plaintiffs’ daughter/Before and After Witness 

7. MARY GRIFFITHS 

907 Cavan Drive

Apopka, FL 32703

407-936-5698

Before and After Witness (family friend)

8. PEGGY ANGALL 

6723 King Rail Ct

 Orlando, FL 32810

 407-591-8386

Plaintiff’s sister/Before and After Witness 

9. Gabrielle Leonce-Mendez

 560 Bay Grove Road

Loganville, GA 30052

407-715-7453

Plaintiffs’ daughter/Before and After Witness 

10. Oriel Leonce

 560 Bay Grove Road

 Loganville, GA 30052

 407-409-4715

Plaintiffs’ daughter/Before and After Witness 

11. Shane Mendez

 2338 Sandridge Circle

 Eustis, FL 32726

 561-215-1509

Plaintiffs’ son-in-law/Before and After Witness 
▪ FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.▪

622 NE First Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 ▪ TEL #(352) 372-7777 ▪ FAX #(877) 272-9101 

Page 4 of 12

12. Rajindersing H. Dosanjh

32001 Avenue 11 1⁄4

Madera, California 93636

(559) 206-9550

Mr. Dosanjh was the CEO of On Point Transport, Inc.

13. Joseph Misatuli Leia

8633 East Manning Avenue

Selma, California 93662

(559) 790-9322

Mr. Leia is the Defendant driver.

14. Kimo Leia

2020 Young Street

Apartment 102 Selma, California 93662

(Telephone number unknown)

Kimo Leia was a passenger in the Defendant's vehicle at the time of the accident.

15. Trooper A. Perez, Florida Highway Patrol Badge #3678

Troop B 

600 SE 25th Avenue

Ocala, FL 34471 

352-512-6630 

Trooper Perez investigated the accident on behalf of Florida Highway Patrol

16. Dr. Andrew Akerman, MD

SimonMed Imaging / MRI SimonMed Florida Winter Park (location of MRI) 

1110 W. Fairbanks Ave.

Winter Park, FL 32789 

407-629-7160 / 888-685-3907 (billing)

MRI diagnostic testing/Radiologist

17. Dr. Mark J. Timken, MD, RPVI 

Stand Up MRI of Orlando

2010 S. Orange Avenue

Orlando, FL 328067 

407-841-1800 

MRI diagnostic testing/Radiologist 

18. Dr. Alejandro J Arias (Cigna Disability Psych-Neuro evaluation) 

Psychological & Neurobehavioral Associates Inc.

P.O. Box 278455

Miramar, FL 33027 

dr.alex@mindspring.com

305-766-5629 / 305-390-2963 

CIGNA hired Dr. Arias to do Disability Evaluation
▪ FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.▪

622 NE First Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 ▪ TEL #(352) 372-7777 ▪ FAX #(877) 272-9101 

Page 5 of 12

19. Walter A. Guntharp, Jr. (317) 485-6114

Guntharp & Associates **REBUTTAL WITNESS**

 8498 West Fall Creek Drive

 Pendleton, Indiana 46064

Rebuttal Expert Trucking Witness 

20. Dr. Andrew Akerman, MD (754) 230-6917 

South Beach Radiology Services, LLC **REBUTTAL WITNESS** 

650 West Avenue, Suite 2302

Miami Beach, FL 33139

Rebuttal Expert Radiologist Witness 

Witnesses Plaintiff’s May Call if the Need Arises

21. Dr. Deanna Carr

Physician Associates Family Medicine

1134 Kelton Ave 

Ocoee, Fl 34761 

407-306-6355 

Medical Treatment

22. Dr. Constance George-Adebayo

Christ the King Medical Center

3531 Highway 81 S. 

Loganville, GA 30052 

770–554–8015

Medical Treatment

23. Dr. F. Daniel Koch

Resurgens Orthopedics, PC

1600 Medical Way Suite#150 

Snellville, GA 30078

404-847-9999

Orthopedic Treatment

24. Dr. Robert Ostheim

West Orange Wellness & Injury Center

288 Moore Road

Ocoee, FL 34761 

407-877-7117

Subject: Medical Treatment

25. Dr. Nadia M. Sadek, MD 

Family Health Center

1151 Blackwood Ave., #150
▪ FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.▪

622 NE First Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 ▪ TEL #(352) 372-7777 ▪ FAX #(877) 272-9101 

Page 6 of 12

Ocoee, FL 34761

407–297–3838 

(referred to Dr. Tawfiq Al-Lahham)

Medical Treatment - 48/72 hrs. EEG at home ordered by Dr. Sadek 

26. Dr. Raul Rodas, DO 

Florida Surgery Consultants (Rodas no longer with this practice)

604 Robin Road, Suite 1

Lakeland, FL 33803 

(35111 US North FL, Palm Harbor, FL 34684)

407-704-8925

Subject: Medical Treatment

27. Dr. Sanjeev Tendolkar

Loganville Family Medicine

4589 Lawrenceville Road

Loganville, GA 30052 

770-466-8672

Medical Treatment

28. Dr. Tawfiq Al-Lahham

Neurosurgeon

1000 West Colonial Dr. Suite 289

Ocoee, FL 34761

407–296–1910

Medical Treatment

29. Any and all witnesses identified by Defendant.

30. Any and all witnesses called by Defendant.

31. Any impeachment and rebuttal witnesses as necessary.

32. Any custodian of records necessary to authenticate documents.

33. All other treating medical providers identified during Discovery by any party.

II. RULE 26(a)(3)(B): DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS

Plaintiff expects to present Dr. Robert Ostheim’s testimony by deposition (objections are 

to be ruled on). 

Plaintiff reserves the right to further designate depositions if a witness listed above 

becomes unavailable.
▪ FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.▪

622 NE First Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 ▪ TEL #(352) 372-7777 ▪ FAX #(877) 272-9101 

Page 7 of 12

III. RULE 26(a)(3)(C): IDENTIFICATION OF EXHIBITS

Exhibits Plaintiff’s Expect to Present

1. Medical Records from

MARION COUNTY EMS

2. Medical Records from

HAMILTON COUNTY EMS

3. Medical Records from

AMR – RURAL EMS

4. Medical Records from

SHANDS AT UF

5. Medical Records from

SHANDS RADIOLOGY (CT Scan and DVD)

6. Medical Records from

LOGANVILLE FAMILY – DR. TENDOLKAR

7. Medical Records from

FAMILY HEALTH CTR – DR. NADIA SADEK

8. Medical Records from

CHRIST THE KING MEDICAL CENTER – DR. CONSTANCE

GEORGE-ADEBAYO

9. Medical Records from

RESURGENS ORTHO

10. Medical Records from

WEST ORANGE/ TRUE HEALTH – Dr. Robert Ostheim, DC

11. Medical Records from

STAND UP MRI

12. Medical Records from

NEUROSPINE – Dr. Mitchell Supler

13. Medical Records from

NOC PHYSICIANS ASSOC – Dr. Carr

14. Medical Records from

FL SURGERY CONS. -Dr. Rodas
▪ FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.▪

622 NE First Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 ▪ TEL #(352) 372-7777 ▪ FAX #(877) 272-9101 

Page 8 of 12

15. Medical Records from

ADVENT HEALTH CTs

16. Medical Records from ADVENT HEALTH RADIOLOGY /

IMAGING Studies (CDS)

17. Medical Records from

ADVENT HEALTH SUNBELT SYSTEMS

18. Medical Records from

HEADACHE AND NEUROLOGICAL TREATMENT INSTITUTE

(MARC SHARFMAN, MD)

19. Medical Records from

MARC SHARFMAN Disability Medical Request Form12.7.15

20. Medical Records from

MARC SHARFMAN Physical Ability Assessment 5.19.16

21. Medical Records from

SIMON MED MRI

22. Medical Records from

ERLANGER EAST HOSPITAL

23. Medical Records from SE PHYSIOTHERAPY

24. Medical Records from AICA Ortho and Spine

25. FL TRAFFIC CRASH REPORT

26. ELITE AUTO COLLISION PD ESTIMATE

27. PROPERTY DAMAGE PHOTOS FROM ELITE

28. PROPERTY DAMAGE DAMAGE PHOTOS FROM GEICO

29. BEFORE AND AFTER PHOTOGRAPHS

30. MOVING ROAD VIDEO OF I-75 ROADWAY AT MM 372

31. PHOTOS OF I-75 ROADWAY TAKEN BY GUNTHARP

32. Economist Report from expert, Joyce Eastridge
▪ FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.▪

622 NE First Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 ▪ TEL #(352) 372-7777 ▪ FAX #(877) 272-9101 

Page 9 of 12

33. Vocational Rehabilitation Expert Report from Lisa Hellier, Spruance

& Associates

34. Marc Sharfman IME Report 9/30/20

35. Neuropsychological Evaluation – Dr. Alejandro Arias

36. Akerman 2nd Opinion MRI REPORTS (REBUTTAL)

37. LIFE CARE PLAN from Physician Life Care Planning (Dr. Leber)

38. Medical Visits and treatment, attendance logs plotted on calendar

39. MORTALITY Tables

40. MEDICAL BILL SUMMARY

41. MEDICAL BILLS

42. 49 CFR § 392.14 – Hazardous conditions; extreme caution

Exhibits Plaintiff May Offer if the Need Arises

43. Marcelle Angall-Leonce PRIOR Medical Records

44. Florida Traffic Crash Report D/L: 7/26/15

45. Cigna Disability file of MARCELLE ANGALL-LEONCE

46. Wage Loss Documents and Tax Returns of MARCELLE ANGALLLEONCE

47. MARCELLE ANGALL-LEONCE

Deposition transcript, depo exhibits

48. ROMANUS LEONCE

Deposition transcript, depo exhibits

49. LISA HELLIER (SPRUANCE & ASSOCIATES)

Deposition transcript, depo exhibits
▪ FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.▪

622 NE First Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 ▪ TEL #(352) 372-7777 ▪ FAX #(877) 272-9101 

Page 10 of 12

50. DR. CHRISTOPHER LEBER

Deposition transcript, depo exhibits

51. DR. MARC SHARFMAN – VOLUME I

Deposition Transcript and exhibits

52. DR. MARC SHARFMAN – VOLUME II

Deposition Transcript and exhibits

53. DR. STEVEN BAILEY – DEFENSE CME

Deposition transcript and depo exhibits

54. CHRISTINA COMISAREK – DEFENSE TRUCKING EXPERT

Deposition transcript, and depo exhibits

55. GEOFFREY NEGIN – DEFENSE RADIOLOGIST

Deposition transcript, and depo exhibits

56. JOSEPH MISATULI LEIA

Deposition transcript, and depo exhibits

57. ON POINT – RAJINDER DOSANJH

Deposition transcript, and depo exhibits

58. ANDREW AKERMAN, MD

Deposition transcript, and depo exhibits

59. WALTER GUNTHARP

Deposition transcript, and depo exhibits

60. ROBERT OSTHEIM, DC

Deposition transcript, and depo exhibits

61. Plaintiff reserves the right to use any exhibits listed by any other party.

62. Any newly discovered evidence, records, reports, and exhibits.

63. Applicable Florida Statutes, Federal Statutes and all applicable

ordinances in regards to this case

64. All papers, records, and writings provided by Defendant to Plaintiff in

this case and/or attached to pleadings, papers, motions or other filings

in this case.

65. Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement and/or amend this Exhibit

List.
▪ FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.▪

622 NE First Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 ▪ TEL #(352) 372-7777 ▪ FAX #(877) 272-9101 

Page 11 of 12

66. Plaintiff reserves any and all objections to any and all exhibits listed by 

any other party in this action. 

34. It is hereby further disclosed that, all medical providers listed in this pretrial 

disclosure, witness disclosure and/or expert witness disclosure will testify regarding their care 

and treatment of the Plaintiff, as well as render expert medical opinions, said expert will also 

give opinions within a reasonable degree of probability within the field of testimony, regarding 

causation of plaintiff’s injuries, permanency of Injuries, prognosis of the plaintiff, limitations and 

restrictions of the Plaintiff, impairment ratings, loss of bodily function, or significant scarring, 

and whether the expert relates his/her involvement and expense to the event sued upon. They 

will also testify regarding the reasonableness and the necessity of the plaintiff's medical care up 

until the time of trial and the need for future medical care. They will testify as to the matters 

contained within their medical records as well as the plaintiff's history, physical examinations, 

and diagnostic tests as well as the cost for past and anticipated future medical care and treatment. 

Said expert will also give opinions within a reasonable degree of probability within the field of 

testimony, about the future needs of the patient in terms of care, frequency of visits, follow-up 

surgeries, prescriptions, imaging, home care, physical therapy P.R.N., household and job 

changes or aids, assistive devices, hospitalizations necessary, procedures necessary and the 

projected costs of these along with any other foreseeable needs and expenses within the expertise 

of the treating doctor. All expenses, both past and future, will be given in present day dollars. 

Those opinions at trial will be preceded by the expert's testimony as to his or her credentials.

35. A witness who is not a "retained expert" under Florida Law pursuant to Frantz v. 

Golebiewski, 407 So2d 283 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Ryder Truck Rental v. Perez, 715 So.2d 289,

(Fla. 3d DCA 1981); and Winn-Dixie v. Miles, 616 So.2d 1108, (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), however 

due to their position in this case, may offer both factual and expert testimony, including but not 

limited to liability, causation, permanency and damages both past and future. These witnesses 

are expected to testify concerning his or her interaction with the Plaintiff, any conclusions, any 

treatment modalities provided, and any recommendations and opinions regarding Plaintiff's 

future, including the necessity of future treatment and the costs associated with such. The basis 

for this testimony may include the depositions in this matter, the medical records, the physical 

evidence, any photographs, any accident reports, any witness statements and any other discovery 

in this matter. Defendant(s) are hereby offered to take the depositions of any such designated 

witnesses to inquire further.

36. This Rule 26 Disclosure is being served in accordance with this Court’s 

Scheduling and Mediation Order dated July 21, 2020 and Order for Pretrial Conference entered 

February 25, 2021. This action has been set for jury trial for the trial docket beginning April 7, 

2021.

37. Plaintiff reserves the right to amend or supplement this Pretrial disclosure should 

additional witnesses or exhibits be identified through discovery prior to the trial of this cause in 

accordance with Florida law and Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.
▪ FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.▪

622 NE First Street, Gainesville, FL 32601 ▪ TEL #(352) 372-7777 ▪ FAX #(877) 272-9101 

Page 12 of 12

38. Plaintiffs, MARCELLE ANN ANGALL-LEONCE AND ROMANUS 

SYLVESTER LEONCE, HUSBAND AND WIFE, reserve the right to supplement these

disclosures when required and as allowed under Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(e)(2).

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true copy of this pleading has been furnished via email to: 

John Moffitt Howell, Esq., and E.T. Fernandez, Esq., Fernandez Trial Lawyers, PA, 8780-200 

Perimeter Park Court, Jacksonville, FL 32216, pleadings@fernandeztl.com,

JHowell@Fernandeztl.com, KLang-Thorbs@Fernandeztl.com, on this 8

th day of March, 2021. 

Respectfully submitted,

FINE, FARKASH & PARLAPIANO, P.A.

622 Northeast First Street

Gainesville, Florida 32601

Telephone: 352-376-6046

Facsimile: 877-272-9101

BY: /S/ JACK J. FINE 

 JACK J. FINE, ESQ.

 Attorney for Plaintiff

 Florida Bar Number: 223700

Primary Email: jfine@ffplaw.com

Secondary Email: jduchaj@ffplaw.com
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

MARCELLE ANN ANGALL-LEONCE 

and ROMANUS SYLVESTER LEONCE,

Plaintiffs,

v. CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-127-AW-GRJ

ON POINT TRANSPORT, INC., AND

JOSEPH MISATULI LEIA

Defendants.

/

DEFENDANTS’ WITNESS LIST

COME NOW the Defendants, ON POINT TRANSPORT, INC., and JOSEPH 

MISATULI LEIA, by and through their undersigned counsel, and pursuant to this Court’s 

Order For Pretrial Conference dated February 25, 2021 (Doc. #32), hereby discloses the 

following witnesses to be called at trial during the two-week trial term beginning Wednesday, 

April 7, 2021:

1. Marcelle Ann Angall-Leonce

2. Romanus Sylvester Leonce

3. Joseph Misatuli Leia

4. Steven Bailey, M.D. with Southern Integrated Neurosurgery

Defendants’ Expert Witness

5. Christina Comisarek with North East Commercial Safety Consulting

Defendants Expert Witness

6. Geoffrey Negin, M.D.

Defendants’ Expert Witness

7. FHP Trooper A. Perez
8. Brian Fugate, EMT with Marion County Fire & Rescue

9. John Klubenspies, D.C. with AICA Orthopedics

10. Ivo Tremont, M.D. with Houston Methodist Hospital, Department of Neurosurgery

Any witnesses listed by the Plaintiffs to the extent that Defendants do not otherwise 

object to same.

Any and all of the witnesses revealed through discovery to the extent that Defendants do 

not otherwise object to same.

Any and all rebuttal and/or impeachment witnesses.

This Defendants reserve the right to amend or supplement this witness list prior to the 

trial of this cause in accordance with Florida law and Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

MARCELLE ANN ANGALL-LEONCE 

and ROMANUS SYLVESTER LEONCE, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. Case No.: 1:20-cv-127-AW-GRJ

ON POINT TRANSPORT, INC., and 

JOSEPH MISATULI LEIA

Defendants.

___________________________________________/

VERDICT

We, the jury, return the following verdict:

1. Was there negligence on the part of Defendant, JOSEPH MISATULI LEIA, which 

was a legal cause of loss, injury or damage to the Plaintiff, MARCELLE ANN ANGALLLEONCE?

ANSWER: YES NO

If your answer to question 1 is NO, your verdict is for the Defendants, and you should not proceed 

further, except to date and sign this verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to 

question 1 is YES, please answer question 2.

2. What is the amount of any damages sustained by Plaintiff, MARCELLE ANN 

ANGALL-LEONCE, for medical expenses, 

a. in the past? $

b. in the future? $

Please answer question 3.

3. What is the amount of any damages sustained by the Plaintiff, MARCELLE ANN 

ANGALL-LEONCE, for lost earnings or earning ability, 

a. in the past? $

b. in the future? $

c. Total of the above damages (add lines 2a, 2b, 3a and 3b) $

Please answer question 4.
4. Were any of the injuries sustained by Plaintiff, MARCELLE ANN ANGALLLEONCE, as a result of this crash, in whole or in part, permanent, within a reasonable degree of 

medical probability?

ANSWER: YES NO

If your answer to question 4 is NO, you should not proceed further except to date and sign this 

verdict form and return it to the courtroom. If your answer to question 4 is YES, please answer 

question 5.

5. What is the total amount of Plaintiff, MARCELLE ANN ANGALL-LEONCE’s 

damages for pain and suffering, disability, physical impairment, disfigurement, mental anguish, 

inconvenience, aggravation of a disease or physical defect and loss of capacity for the enjoyment 

of life sustained in the past and to be sustained in the future?

a. in the past? $

b. in the future? $

c. Total of the above damages (add lines 5a and 5b): $

Please answer question 6.

Total of the above damages (add lines 3c and 5c): $

SO SAY WE ALL, this day of April, 2021.

FOREPERSON
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

MARCELLE ANN ANGALL-LEONCE 

and ROMANUS SYLVESTER LEONCE, 

Husband and Wife,

CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-00127-AW-GRJ

Plaintiff,

v.

ON POINT TRANSPORT, INC. and 

JOSEPH MISATULI LEIA, 

Defendants.

________________________________/

PROPOSED JURY INSTRUCTIONS
2

INSTRUCTION 1

General Preliminary Instruction

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 1.1

Members of the Jury:

Now that you’ve been sworn, I need to explain some basic principles 

about a civil trial and your duty as jurors. These are preliminary instructions. 

I’ll give you more detailed instructions at the end of the trial.

The jury’s duty:

It’s your duty to listen to the evidence, decide what happened, and apply 

the law to the facts. It’s my job to provide you with the law you must apply –

and you must follow the law even if you disagree with it.

What is evidence:

You must decide the case on only the evidence presented in the 

courtroom. Evidence comes in many forms. It can be testimony about what 

someone saw, heard, or smelled. It can be an exhibit or a photograph. It can 

be someone’s opinion.

Some evidence may prove a fact indirectly. Let’s say a witness saw wet 

grass outside and people walking into the courthouse carrying wet umbrellas. 

This may be indirect evidence that it rained, even though the witness didn’t 
3

personally see it rain. Indirect evidence like this is also called “circumstantial 

evidence” – simply a chain of circumstances that likely proves a fact.

As far as the law is concerned, it makes no difference whether evidence 

is direct or indirect. You may choose to believe or disbelieve either kind. Your 

job is to give each piece of evidence whatever weight you think it deserves.

What is not evidence:

During the trial, you’ll hear certain things that are not evidence and you 

must not consider them.

First, the lawyers’ statements and arguments aren’t evidence. In their 

opening statements and closing arguments, the lawyers will discuss the case. 

Their remarks may help you follow each side’s arguments and presentation of 

evidence. But the remarks themselves aren’t evidence and shouldn’t play a 

role in your deliberations.

Second, the lawyers’ questions and objections aren’t evidence. Only the 

witnesses’ answers are evidence. Don’t decide that something is true just 

because a lawyer’s question suggests that it is. For example, a lawyer may ask 

a witness, “You saw Mr. Jones hit his sister, didn’t you?” That question is not 

evidence of what the witness saw or what Mr. Jones did – unless the witness 

agrees with it.
4

There are rules of evidence that control what the court can receive into 

evidence. When a lawyer asks a witness a question or presents an exhibit, the 

opposing lawyer may object if he thinks the rules of evidence don’t permit it. 

If I overrule the objection, then the witness may answer the question or the 

court may receive the exhibit. If I sustain the objection, then the witness 

cannot answer the question, and the court cannot receive the exhibit. When I 

sustain an objection to a question, you must ignore the question and not guess 

what the answer might have been.

Sometimes I may disallow evidence – this is also called “striking” 

evidence – and order you to disregard or ignore it. That means that you must 

not consider that evidence when you are deciding the case.

I may allow some evidence for only a limited purpose. When I instruct 

you that I have admitted an item of evidence for a limited purpose, you must 

consider it for only that purpose and no other.

Credibility of witnesses:

To reach a verdict, you may have to decide which testimony to believe 

and which testimony not to believe. You may believe everything a witness 

says, part of it, or none of it. When considering a witness’s testimony, you 

may take into account:
5

· the witness’s opportunity and ability to see, hear, or know the 

things the witness is testifying about;

· the witness’s memory;

· the witness’s manner while testifying;

· any interest the witness has in the outcome of the case;

· any bias or prejudice the witness may have;

· any other evidence that contradicts the witness’s testimony;

· the reasonableness of the witness’s testimony in light of all the 

evidence; and

· any other factors affecting believability.

At the end of the trial, I’ll give you additional guidelines for 

determining a witness’s credibility.

Description of the case:

This is a civil case. To help you follow the evidence, I’ll summarize the 

parties’ positions. The Plaintiffs, Marcelle Angall-Leonce and Romanus 

Leonce, claim that Defendant, Joseph Leia, while driving a tractor-trailer as 

part of his employment with Defendant On Point Transport, negligently 

caused a collision between that tractor-trailer and a vehicle being driven by 

Mr. Leonce. The Plaintiffs further contend that this collision caused loss, 

injury, and damages to Mrs. Angall-Leonce and that as a result of his wife’s
6

injuries, Mr. Leonce lost companionship, affection, solace, society, assistance, 

and support.

The Defendants deny any negligence on the part of Joseph Misatuli 

Leia. Rather, they contend that the subject accident was the result of an 

unforeseeable, sudden emergent situation that presented itself to Mr. Leia as 

he crested a hill on I-75 North during heavy rain and rather poor visibility. 

Consequently, the Defendants maintain that Mr. Leia acted appropriately at 

all times and drove his tractor-trailer in accordance with industry standards. 

The Defendants also contend that Plaintiff, Marcelle Ann Angall-Leonce did 

not sustain a permanent injury within a degree of reasonable medical 

probability. 

Burden of proof:

The Plaintiffs have the burden of proving their case by what the law 

calls a “preponderance of the evidence.” That means the Plaintiffs must prove 

that, in light of all the evidence, what they claim is more likely true than not. 

So, if you could put the evidence favoring the Plaintiffs and the evidence 

favoring the Defendants on opposite sides of balancing scales, the Plaintiffs

need to make the scales tip to their side. If the Plaintiffs fail to meet this 

burden, you must find in favor of the Defendants.
7

To decide whether any fact has been proved by a preponderance of the 

evidence, you may – unless I instruct you otherwise – consider the testimony 

of all witnesses, regardless of who called them, and all exhibits that the court 

allowed, regardless of who produced them. After considering all the evidence, 

if you decide a claim or fact is more likely true than not, then the claim or fact 

has been proved by a preponderance of the evidence.

Conduct of the jury:

While serving on the jury, you may not talk with anyone about anything 

related to the case. You may tell people that you’re a juror and give them 

information about when you must be in court. But you must not discuss 

anything about the case itself with anyone.

You shouldn’t even talk about the case with each other until you begin 

your deliberations. You want to make sure you’ve heard everything – all the 

evidence, the lawyers’ closing arguments, and my instructions on the law –

before you begin deliberating. You should keep an open mind until the end of 

the trial. Premature discussions may lead to a premature decision.

In this age of technology, I want to emphasize that in addition to not 

talking face-to-face with anyone about the case, you must not communicate 

with anyone about the case by any other means. This includes e-mails, text 
8

messages, phone calls, and the Internet, including social-networking websites 

and apps such as Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, YouTube, and Twitter. You 

may not use any similar technology of social media, even if I have not 

specifically mentioned it here.

You must not provide any information about the case to anyone by any 

means whatsoever, and that includes posting information about the case, or 

what you are doing in the case, on any device or Internet site, including blogs, 

chat rooms, social websites, or any other means.

You also shouldn’t Google or search online or offline for any 

information about the case, the parties, or the law. Don’t read or listen to the 

news about this case, visit any places related to this case, or research any fact, 

issue, or law related to this case. The law forbids the jurors to talk with anyone 

else about the case and forbids anyone else to talk to the jurors about it. It’s 

very important that you understand why these rules exist and why they’re so 

important. You must base your decision only on the testimony and other 

evidence presented in the courtroom. It is not fair to the parties if you base 

your decision in any way on information you acquire outside the courtroom. 

For example, the law often uses words and phrases in special ways, so it’s 

important that any definitions you hear come only from me and not from any 
9

other source. Only you jurors can decide a verdict in this case. The law sees 

only you as fair, and only you have promised to be fair – no one else is so 

qualified.

Taking notes:

If you wish, you may take notes to help you remember what the 

witnesses said. If you do take notes, please don’t share them with anyone until 

you go to the jury room to decide the case. Don’t let note-taking distract you 

from carefully listening to and observing the witnesses. When you leave the 

courtroom, you should leave your notes hidden from view in the jury room.

Whether or not you take notes, you should rely on your own memory 

of the testimony. Your notes are there only to help your memory. They’re not 

entitled to greater weight than your memory or impression about the 

testimony.

Course of the trial:

Let’s walk through the trial. First, each side may make an opening 

statement, but they don’t have to. Remember, an opening statement isn’t 

evidence, and it’s not supposed to be argumentative; it’s just an outline of 

what that party intends to prove.
10

Next, the Plaintiffs will present their witnesses and ask them questions. 

After the Plaintiffs question the witness, the Defendants may ask the witness 

questions – this is called “cross-examining” the witness. Then the Defendants

will present their witnesses, and the Plaintiffs may cross-examine them. You 

should base your decision on all the evidence, regardless of which party 

presented it.

After all the evidence is in, the parties’ lawyers will present their 

closing arguments to summarize and interpret the evidence for you, and then 

I’ll give you instructions on the law.

You’ll then go to the jury room to deliberate.
11

INSTRUCTION 2

Stipulations

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 2.1

Sometimes the parties have agreed that certain facts are true. This agreement

is called a stipulation. You must treat these facts as proved for this case.
12

INSTRUCTION 3

Jury Questions

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 1.4

During this trial, you may submit questions to a witness after the lawyers

have finished their own questioning. Here is how the procedure works: After each

witness has testified, and the lawyers have asked all of their questions, I’ll ask if

any of you have questions. If you have a question, write it down and give it to the

court staff.

You may submit a question for a witness only to clarify an answer or to help

you understand the evidence. Our experience with juror questions indicates that

jurors rarely have more than a few questions for any one witness, and there may be

no questions at all for some witnesses.

If you submit a question, the court staff will give it to me and I’ll share your

questions with the lawyers in the case. If the rules of evidence allow your question,

one of the lawyers or I will read your question to the witness. I may modify the

form or phrasing of a question so that it’s allowed under the evidence rules.

Sometimes, I may not allow the questions to be read to the witness, either because

the law does not allow it or because another witness is in a better position to

answer the question. If I can’t allow the witness to answer a question, you must not

draw any conclusions from that fact or speculate on what the answer might have

been.
13

Here are several important things to keep in mind about your questions for

the witnesses:

• First, you must submit all questions in writing. Please don’t ask any

questions aloud.

• Second, the court can’t re-call witnesses to the stand for additional

juror questions. If you have a question for a particular witness, you

must submit it when I ask.

• Finally, because you should remain neutral and open-minded

throughout the trial, you should phrase your questions in a way that

doesn’t express an opinion about the case or a witness. You must

keep an open mind until you’ve heard all the evidence, the closing

arguments, and my final instructions on the law.
14

INSTRUCTION 4

Introduction

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 3.1

Members of the jury:

It’s my duty to instruct you on the rules of law that you must use in deciding 

this case. When I have finished you will go to the jury room and begin your 

discussions, sometimes called deliberations.
15

INSTRUCTION 5

The Duty to Follow Instructions – Corporate Party Involved

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 3.2.2

Your decision must be based only on the evidence presented here. You must 

not be influenced in any way by either sympathy for or prejudice against anyone.

You must follow the law as I explain it – even if you do not agree with the law – and 

you must follow all of my instructions as a whole. You must not single out or 

disregard any of the instructions on the law.

The fact that a corporation is involved as a party must not affect your decision 

in any way. A corporation and all other persons stand equal before the law and must 

be dealt with as equals in a court of justice. When a corporation is involved, of 

course, it may act only through people as its employees; and, in general, a 

corporation is responsible under the law for the acts and statements of its employees 

that are made within the scope of their duties as employees of the company.
16

INSTRUCTION 6

Consideration of Direct and Circumstantial Evidence;

Argument of Counsel; Comments by the Court

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 3.3

As I said before, you must consider only the evidence that I have admitted in 

the case. Evidence includes the testimony of witnesses and the exhibits admitted. 

But, anything the lawyers say is not evidence and isn’t binding on you.

You shouldn’t assume from anything I’ve said that I have any opinion about 

any factual issue in this case. Except for my instructions to you on the law, you 

should disregard anything I may have said during the trial in arriving at your own 

decision about the facts. Your own recollection and interpretation of the evidence is 

what matters.

In considering the evidence you may use reasoning and common sense to 

make deductions and reach conclusions. You shouldn’t be concerned about whether 

the evidence is direct or circumstantial.

“Direct evidence” is the testimony of a person who asserts that he or she has 

actual knowledge of a fact, such as an eyewitness.

“Circumstantial evidence” is proof of a chain of facts and circumstances that 

tend to prove or disprove a fact. There’s no legal difference in the weight you may 

give to either direct or circumstantial evidence.
17

INSTRUCTION 7

Credibility of Witnesses

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 3.4

When I say you must consider all the evidence, I don’t mean that you must 

accept all the evidence as true or accurate. You should decide whether you believe 

what each witness had to say, and how important that testimony was. In making that 

decision you may believe or disbelieve any witness, in whole or in part. The number 

of witnesses testifying concerning a particular point doesn’t necessarily matter.

To decide whether you believe any witness I suggest that you ask yourself a 

few questions: 

1. Did the witness impress you as one who was telling the truth?

2. Did the witness have any particular reason not to tell the truth?

3. Did the witness have a personal interest in the outcome of the case?

4. Did the witness seem to have a good memory?

5. Did the witness have the opportunity and ability to accurately 

observe the things he or she testified about?

6. Did the witness appear to understand the questions clearly and 

answer them directly?

7. Did the witness’s testimony differ from other testimony or other 

evidence?
18

INSTRUCTION 8

Impeachment of Witnesses Because of Inconsistent Statements

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 3.5.1

You should also ask yourself whether there was evidence that a witness 

testified falsely about an important fact. And ask whether there was evidence that at 

some other time a witness said or did something, or didn’t say or do something, that 

was different from the testimony the witness gave during this trial.

But keep in mind that a simple mistake doesn’t mean a witness wasn’t telling 

the truth as he or she remembers it. People naturally tend to forget some things or 

remember them inaccurately. So, if a witness misstated something, you must decide 

whether it was because of an innocent lapse in memory or an intentional deception. 

The significance of your decision may depend on whether the misstatement is about 

an important fact or about an unimportant detail.
19

INSTRUCTION 9

Expert Witness – When Expert Fees Represent a Significant

Portion of the Witness’s Income

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 3.6.2

When scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge might be helpful, a 

person who has special training or experience in that field is allowed to state an 

opinion about the matter. But that doesn’t mean you must accept the witness’s 

opinion. As with any other witness’s testimony, you must decide for yourself 

whether to rely upon the opinion.

When a witness is being paid for reviewing and testifying concerning the 

evidence, you may consider the possibility of bias and should view with caution the 

testimony of such witness where court testimony is given with regularity and 

represents a significant portion of the witness’s income.
20

INSTRUCTION 10

Believability of a Witness

Florida Standard Civil Jury Instruction 601(2)(c) 

It is entirely proper for a lawyer to talk to a witness about what testimony the 

witness would give if called to the courtroom. The witness should not be discredited 

just because the witness talked with a lawyer about his or her testimony.
21

INSTRUCTION 11

Negligence

Florida Standard Civil Jury Instruction 401.4

Negligence is the failure to use reasonable care, which is the care that a 

reasonably careful person would use under like circumstances. Negligence is doing 

something that a reasonably careful person would not do under like circumstances 

or failing to do something that a reasonably careful person would do under like 

circumstances.
22

INSTRUCTION 12

Violation of Industry Standard as Evidence of Negligence

Florida Standard Civil Jury Instruction 401.9 (modified)

Seaboard Coast Line R. Co. v. Clark, 491 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. 4th DCA) 1986

Violation of an industry standard is evidence of negligence. It is not, however, 

conclusive evidence of negligence. If you find that Defendant Joseph Leia violated 

an industry standard, you may consider that fact, together with the other facts and 

circumstances, in deciding whether such person was negligent.

Injury standards the plaintiffs contend were violated include the following:

A. Commercial truck drivers should reduce speed by about one third on a wet 

road.

B. Commercial truck drivers should look at least 12 to 15 seconds ahead. At 

highway speeds that is about a quarter of a mile. 
23

401.9 VIOLATION OF STATUTE, ORDINANCE, OR REGULATION 

AS EVIDENCE OF NEGLIGENCE 

316.185 Special hazards. —

The fact that the speed of a vehicle is lower than the prescribed limits shall not 

relieve the driver from the duty to decrease speed when approaching and crossing an 

intersection, when approaching and going around a curve, when approaching a hill 

crest, when traveling upon any narrow or winding roadway, or when special hazards 

exist or may exist with respect to pedestrians or other traffic or by reason of weather 

or other roadway conditions, and speed shall be decreased as may be necessary to 

avoid colliding with any person, vehicle, or other conveyance on or entering the 

street in compliance with legal requirements and the duty of all persons to use due 

care. 

Violation of this statute is evidence of negligence. It is not, however, conclusive 

evidence of negligence. If you find that Joseph Leia, violated this statute, you may 

consider that fact, together with the other facts and circumstances, in deciding 

whether he was negligent.
24

Florida Statute §316.1925 Careless driving -

(1) Any person operating a vehicle upon the streets or highways within the state 

shall drive the same in a careful and prudent manner, having regard for the width, 

grade, curves, corners, traffic, and all other attendant circumstances, so as not to 

endanger the life, limb, or property of any person. 

Violation of this statute is evidence of negligence. It is not, however, conclusive 

evidence of negligence. If you find that Joseph Leia, violated this statute, you may 

consider that fact, together with the other facts and circumstances, in deciding 

whether he was negligent.

F.S. §316.0895 Following too closely. —

(1) The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely 

than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicles 

and the traffic upon, and the condition of, the highway.

Violation of this statute is evidence of negligence. It is not, however, conclusive 

evidence of negligence. If you find that Joseph Leia, violated this statute, you may 

consider that fact, together with the other facts and circumstances, in deciding 

whether he was negligent.
25

F.S. §316.089 Driving on roadways laned for traffic. —

Whenever any roadway has been divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for 

traffic, the following rules, in addition to all others consistent herewith, shall apply:

(1) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practicable entirely within a single lane 

and shall not be moved from such lane until the driver has first ascertained that such 

movement can be made with safety.

Violation of this statute is evidence of negligence. It is not, however, conclusive 

evidence of negligence. If you find that Joseph Leia, violated this statute, you may 

consider that fact, together with the other facts and circumstances, in deciding

whether he was negligent.
26

Restrictions have been in place on I-95 in South Florida for 30 years, and 20 

years on I-75 from the Florida/Georgia border to the Turnpike. 

The current truck lane criterion in Florida includes 6-lane interstate freeways 

primarily consisting of rural interstate sections. Trucks are restricted from the 

left or inside travel lane, leaving it specifically for automobile traffic. Tour 

buses and recreational vehicles (RVs) are not considered commercial trucks 

and are allowed to travel in the left or inside travel lane.

Failure to follow truck lane restrictions is a violation of Florida Statute 316.074, 

with a minimum fine of $121 and three points assessed to the CDL (Commercial 

Driver License).

F.S. §316.074 Obedience to and required traffic control devices. —

(1) The driver of any vehicle shall obey the instructions of any official traffic 

control device applicable thereto, placed in accordance with the provisions of this 

chapter, unless otherwise directed by a police officer, subject to the exceptions 

granted the driver of an authorized emergency vehicle in this chapter.

(2) No person shall drive any vehicle from a roadway to another roadway to avoid 

obeying the indicated traffic control indicated by such traffic control device.
27

(3) No provision of this chapter for which official traffic control devices are 

required shall be enforced against an alleged violator if at the time and place of the 

alleged violation an official device is not in proper position and sufficiently legible 

to be seen by an ordinarily observant person. Whenever a particular section does not 

state that official traffic control devices are required, such section shall be effective 

even though no devices are erected or in place.

(4) Whenever official traffic control devices are placed in position approximately 

conforming to the requirements of this chapter, such devices shall be presumed to 

have been so placed by the official act or direction of lawful authority unless the 

contrary shall be established by competent evidence.

(5) Any official traffic control device placed pursuant to the provisions of this 

chapter and purporting to conform to the lawful requirements pertaining to such 

devices shall be presumed to comply with the requirements of this chapter unless the 

contrary shall be established by competent evidence.

Violation of this statute is evidence of negligence. It is not, however, conclusive 

evidence of negligence. If you find that Joseph Leia, violated this statute, you may 

consider that fact, together with the other facts and circumstances, in deciding 

whether he was negligent.
28

Code of Federal Regulations 

TITLE 49—Transportation

Subtitle B—OTHER REGULATIONS RELATING TO TRANSPORTATION 

(CONTINUED)

CHAPTER III—FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION, 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

SUBCHAPTER B—FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY REGULATIONS

PART 392—DRIVING OF COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLES

§392.14 Hazardous conditions; extreme caution.

Extreme caution in the operation of a commercial motor vehicle shall be exercised 

when hazardous conditions, such as those caused by snow, ice, sleet, fog, mist, rain, 

dust, or smoke, adversely affect visibility or traction. Speed shall be reduced when 

such conditions exist. If conditions become sufficiently dangerous, the operation of 

the commercial motor vehicle shall be discontinued and shall not be resumed until 

the commercial motor vehicle can be safely operated. 

Violation of this regulation is evidence of negligence. It is not, however, 

conclusive evidence of negligence. If you find that Joseph Leia, violated this 

regulation, you may consider that fact, together with the other facts and 

circumstances, in deciding whether he was negligent.
29

INSTRUCTION 13

Legal Cause

Florida Standard Civil Jury Instruction 401.12(a) and (b)

Negligence is a legal cause of loss, injury or damage if it directly and in natural 

and continuous sequence produces or contributes substantially to producing such

loss, injury or damage, so that it can reasonably be said that, but for the negligence, 

the loss, injury or damage would not have occurred.

In order to be regarded as a legal cause of loss, injury or damage negligence 

need not be the only cause. Negligence may be a legal cause of loss, injury or damage 

even though it operates in combination with some natural cause or some other cause 

if the negligence contributes substantially to producing such loss, injury or damage.
30

INSTRUCTION 14

PREEMPTIVE CHARGES

Vicarious liability

Florida Standard Civil Jury Instruction 402.8

The court has determined and now instructs you that

ON POINT TRANSPORT, INC. is responsible for any negligence of JOSEPH 

MISATULI LEIA in the operation of the semi-tractor trailer owned by On Point 

Transport, Inc. and driven by their employee, JOSEPH MISATULI LEIA.
31

INSTRUCTION 15

Issues on Plaintiff’s Claim – General Negligence

Responsibility for Proof – Plaintiff’s Claim, Preponderance of the Evidence

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 3.7.1

Florida Standard Civil Jury Instruction 401.18(a)

The issues you must decide on the Plaintiffs’ claim against the Defendants 

are: whether Defendant Joseph Leia was negligent in his operation of the tractortrailer involved in the accident, and, if so, whether such negligence was a legal cause 

of the loss, injury or damage to Marcelle Angall-Leonce and Romanus Leonce

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 3.7.1

In this case, it is the responsibility of the Plaintiffs to prove every essential 

part of their claims by a “preponderance of the evidence.” This is sometimes called 

the “burden of proof” or the “burden of persuasion.” A “preponderance of the 

evidence” simply means an amount of evidence that is enough to persuade you that 

the Plaintiffs’ claim is more likely true than not true. If the proof fails to establish 

any essential part of a claim or contention by a preponderance of the evidence, you 

should find against the Plaintiffs

In deciding whether any fact has been proved by a preponderance of the 

evidence, you may consider the testimony of all of the witnesses, regardless of who 

may have called them, and all of the exhibits received in evidence, regardless of who 

may have produced them.
32

If the proof fails to establish any essential part of the Plaintiffs’ claim by a 

preponderance of the evidence, you should find for the Defendants as to that claim.
33

INSTRUCTION 16

Motor Vehicle No-Fault Instruction

Florida Standard Civil Jury Instruction 501.2 (a-d)

Fla. Stat. §768.0415 (Special)

If your verdict is for the Defendants, you will not consider the matter of damages. 

But if the greater weight of the evidence supports Plaintiffs’ claim, you should 

determine and write on the verdict form, in dollars, the total amount of money that the 

greater weight of the evidence shows will fairly and adequately compensate the 

Plaintiffs for the following elements of damage including damage that Plaintiffs are

reasonably certain to incur in the future: The reasonable value or expense of 

hospitalization and medical and nursing care and treatment necessarily or reasonably 

obtained by Marcelle Angall-Leonce in the past or to be so obtained in the future.

Any earnings lost in the past and any loss of ability to earn money in the future.

You must next decide whether any of Marcelle Angall-Leonce’s injuries, 

resulting from the incident in this case, are permanent. An injury is permanent if it, 

in whole or in part, consists of:

(1) a significant and permanent loss of an important bodily function; or

(2) a significant and permanent scarring or disfigurement; or

(3) an injury that the evidence shows is permanent to a reasonable degree of 

medical probability.
34

If the greater weight of the evidence does not establish that any of Marcelle 

Angall-Leonce’s injuries are permanent, then your verdict is complete. If, however, 

the greater weight of the evidence shows that any of her injuries are permanent, you 

should also award damages for these additional elements of damage: Any bodily 

injury sustained by Marcelle Angall-Leonce and any resulting pain and suffering 

disability or physical impairment disfigurement mental anguish inconvenience or 

loss of capacity for the enjoyment of life experienced in the past or to be experienced 

in the future. There is no exact standard for measuring such damage. The amount 

should be fair and just in the light of the evidence.

On the claim brought by Romanus Leonce, you should award Romanus Leonce 

an amount of money which the greater weight of the evidence shows will fairly and 

adequately compensate him for any loss by reason of his wife’s injury, of her services, 

comfort, society and attentions in the past and in the future caused by the incident in 

question. 
35

INSTRUCTION 17

Other Contributing Causes of Damages

Florida Standard Civil Jury Instruction 501.5(a)

If you find that the Defendants caused a bodily injury, and that the injury 

resulted in an aggravation of an existing disease or physical defect or activation of a 

latent disease or physical defect, you should attempt to decide what portion of Ms. 

Angall-Leonce’s condition resulted from the aggravation or activation. If you can 

make that determination, then you should award only those damages resulting from 

the aggravation or activation. However, if you cannot make that determination, or if 

it cannot be said that the condition would have existed apart from the injury, then 

you should award damages for the entire condition suffered by Ms. Angall-Leonce
36

INSTRUCTION 18

Mortality Tables

Florida Standard Civil Jury Instruction 501.6

If the greater weight of the evidence shows that Marcelle Angall-Leonce has 

been permanently injured, you may consider her life expectancy. The mortality 

tables received in evidence may be considered in determining how long Ms. AngallLeonce may be expected to live. Mortality tables are not binding on you but may be 

considered together with other evidence in the case bearing on Ms. Angall-Leonce’s

health, age and physical condition, before and after the injury, in determining the 

probable length of her life.
37

INSTRUCTION 19

Reduction of Damages to Present Value

Florida Standard Civil Jury Instruction 501.7

Any amount of damages which you allow for future medical expenses or loss 

of ability to earn money in the future should be reduced to its present money value 

and only the present money value of these future economic damages should be 

included in your verdict. The present money value of future economic damages is 

the sum of money needed now which, together with what that sum will earn in the 

future, will compensate for these losses as they are actually experienced in future 

years.
38

INSTRUCTION 20

Collateral Source Rule

Florida Standard Civil Jury Instruction 501.8

You should not reduce the amount of compensation to which the Plaintiffs are

otherwise entitled on account of wages, medical insurance payments, or other benefits 

which the evidence shows the Plaintiffs received from her employer, insurance 

company, or some other source. The court will reduce as necessary the amount of 

compensation to which the Plaintiffs are entitled on account of any such payments.
39

INSTRUCTION 21

Redactions (Special Instruction)

You may note some redactions/deletions from some of the documents and 

video depositions placed in evidence for your consideration. Under our law, only 

certain evidence may be considered by a jury in determining a verdict. You are 

instructed that you must not speculate or even discuss possible reasons for such 

redaction/deletions.
40

INSTRUCTION 22

Duty to Deliberate When Only the Plaintiff Claims Damages

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 3.8.1

Of course, the fact that I have given you instructions concerning the issue of 

Plaintiffs’ damages should not be interpreted in any way as an indication that I 

believe that the Plaintiffs should, or should not, prevail in this case.

Your verdict must be unanimous – in other words, you must all agree. Your 

deliberations are secret, and you’ll never have to explain your verdict to anyone.

Each of you must decide the case for yourself, but only after fully considering 

the evidence with the other jurors. So you must discuss the case with one another 

and try to reach an agreement. While you’re discussing the case, don’t hesitate to 

reexamine your own opinion and change your mind if you become convinced that 

you were wrong. But don’t give up your honest beliefs just because others think 

differently or because you simply want to get the case over with.

Remember that, in a very real way, you’re judges – judges of the facts. Your 

only interest is to seek the truth from the evidence in the case.
41

INSTRUCTION 23

Election of Foreperson Explanation of Verdict Form

Eleventh Circuit Pattern Jury Instruction 3.9

When you get to the jury room, choose one of your members to act as 

foreperson. The foreperson will direct your deliberations and speak for you in court.

A verdict form has been prepared for your convenience.

[Explain verdict]

Take the verdict form with you to the jury room. When you’ve all agreed on 

the verdict, your foreperson must fill in the form, sign it and date it. Then you’ll 

return it to the courtroom.

If you wish to communicate with me at any time, please write down your 

message or question and give it to the court security officer. The court security 

officer will bring it to me and I’ll respond as promptly as possible – either in writing 

or by talking to you in the courtroom. Please understand that I may have to talk to 

the lawyers and the parties before I respond to your question or message, so you 

should be patient as you await my response. But I caution you not to tell me how 

many jurors have voted one way or the other at that time. That type of information 

should remain in the jury room and not be shared with anyone, including me, in your 

note or question.