Case Name: BNP PARIBAS, a foreign corporation and Paribas Principal, Inc., a foreign corporation, Appellants, v. James A. WYNNE, III, individually, and as Trustee of the James A. Wynne, III Revocable Trust No. 2 dated March 19, 1998, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2007-09-05
Citations: 963 So. 2d 944
Docket Number: No. 4D06-3085
Parties: BNP PARIBAS, a foreign corporation and Paribas Principal, Inc., a foreign corporation, Appellants, v. James A. WYNNE, III, individually, and as Trustee of the James A. Wynne, III Revocable Trust No. 2 dated March 19, 1998, Appellee.
Judges: KLEIN, HAZOURI, JJ., and METZGER, ELIZABETH A., Associate Judge, concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 963
Pages: 944–945

Head Matter:
BNP PARIBAS, a foreign corporation and Paribas Principal, Inc., a foreign corporation, Appellants, v. James A. WYNNE, III, individually, and as Trustee of the James A. Wynne, III Revocable Trust No. 2 dated March 19, 1998, Appellee.
No. 4D06-3085.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Sept. 5, 2007.
Caran Rothehild of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, Mark F. Bideau of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., West Palm Beach, Elliot H. Seherker and Elliot B. Kula of Greenberg Traurig, P.A., Miami, and Richard E. Berman of Berman, Kean & Riguera, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.
David B. Pakula of David B. Pakula, P.A., Pembroke Pines, Carlos Rodriguez, Fort Lauderdale, and William R. Leonard, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
BNP Paribas and Paribas Principal, Inc. ("BNP") seek review of an order wherein the trial court imposed a flat, unconditional $50,000 sanction against BNP for discovery violations. BNP contends that the trial court erred by imposing monetary sanctions for discovery violations without first: (1) conducting an evidentiary hearing to determine the amount of reasonable expenses and/or fees to be assessed against BNP for actual losses sustained by Appellee due to the discovery violations at issue; or (2) following the required procedures necessary to find BNP in criminal or civil contempt, for failure to comply with previous court orders relating to discovery. We agree that the trial court erred by imposing a flat, unconditional sanction against BNP without first conducting a preliminary hearing necessary to either grant relief under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.380 or impose sanctions pursuant to the court's contempt powers. As such, we vacate the trial court's order imposing a $50,000 sanction against BNP and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
KLEIN, HAZOURI, JJ., and METZGER, ELIZABETH A., Associate Judge, concur.