Court Opinion

ID: 9881003
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-29 14:04:05.02935+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:58:49.802103
License: Public Domain

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
                       SECOND DISTRICT

              BUREK, INC., d/b/a PINCH A PENNY, a/k/a
             SOUTH TAMPA POOL SUPPLIES & SERVICES;
                      and JOHN L. BUREK, JR.,

                              Appellants,

                                   v.

           SUSAN L. GAGE, as personal representative of the
               Estate of George Williams Gage, III; and
                    BENJAMIN DOUGLAS EHAS,

                               Appellees.

                     Nos. 2D22-2163, 2D22-2818

                           CONSOLIDATED

                          September 29, 2023

Appeals from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Rex Barbas,
Judge.

Tracy Raffles Gunn of Gunn Appellate Practice P.A., Tampa, for
Appellants.

Lisa M. Tanaka, Bennie Lazzara, Jr., and Michael K. Beck of Wilkes &
Associates, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee Susan L. Gage, as personal
representative of the Estate of George Williams Gage, III.

No appearance for Appellee Benjamin Douglas Ehas.
PER CURIAM.

      Affirmed.

CASANUEVA and KHOUZAM, JJ., Concur.
ATKINSON, J., Dissents with opinion.

ATKINSON, Judge, Dissenting.

      I respectfully dissent. Cf. D'Angelo v. Fitzmaurice, 863 So. 2d 311,
318 (Fla. 2003) (answering the "question . . . whether Gouty [v. Schnepel,
795 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 2001)] stands for the proposition that 'a failure to
establish liability will obviate set-off or that there must be a finding of no
liability to preclude recovery' " and "limit[ing] the Gouty holding to cases
where a settling defendant is expressly found not liable" (quoting
D’Angelo v. Fitzmaurice, 832 So. 2d 135, 137 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)); Wal-
Mart Stores, Inc. v. Strachan, 82 So. 3d 1052, 1054 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)
("In Anderson [v. Vander Meiden ex rel. Duggan, 56 So. 3d 830 (Fla. 2d
DCA 2011)], the beneficiary of trusts brought separate complaints
against the defendant and other nonparties alleging mishandling of the
trusts. . . . Unlike the defendant in Anderson, Wal–Mart is seeking
discovery of the settlement amounts, not discovery to ascertain whether
the settled claims arose from the same injury. Here, it is undisputed
that all of the claims in this case relate to the auto accident and arise
from the same injuries. . . . [Wal–Mart] does not need the settlement
information to show that the claims arise from the same injury. . . . If on
appeal Wal–Mart is determined to be entitled to a set-off, the case can be
remanded for the trial court to allow discovery of the settlement amounts
and to set-off these amounts from the final judgment."). See § 46.015(2),
Fla. Stat. (2022) ("At trial, if any person shows the court that the plaintiff,

                                       2
or his or her legal representative, has delivered a written release or
covenant not to sue to any person in partial satisfaction of the damages
sued for, the court shall set off this amount from the amount of any
judgment to which the plaintiff would be otherwise entitled at the time of
rendering judgment." (emphasis added)); § 768.041(2), Fla. Stat. (2022)
("At trial, if any defendant shows the court that the plaintiff, or any
person lawfully on her or his behalf, has delivered a release or covenant
not to sue to any person, firm, or corporation in partial satisfaction of the
damages sued for, the court shall set off this amount from the amount of
any judgment to which the plaintiff would be otherwise entitled at the
time of rendering judgment and enter judgment accordingly." (emphasis
added)).

Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.

                                      3