Preview
Filing# 145752945 E-Filed 03/15/2022 03:10:44 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND
FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
Case No.. CACE 21-007664
TERESA M. EDREIRA,
Plaintiff,
V.
SOUTHERN FIDELITY INSURANCE
COMPANY,
Defendant.
I
DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER FROM DEPOSITION OF
CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE
Defendant, SOUTHERN FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY ..,
("Defendant '),
pursuant
to Florida Rule o f Civil Procedure 1.280(c),and moves this Honorable Court to enter an Order
and
limitingthe scope ofPlaintiff"s depositionofDefendant's corporate representative, states:
1. On February 24,2022, Plaintiff served a Notice o f Taking Videotaped Deposition
Duces Tecum of Defendant's Designated Corporate Representative(the"Notice"). See Notice of
Taking Videotaped Depositionattached as Exhibit "A".
2. Within the confines o f the Notice, Plaintiff requests the witness appear for and be
prepared to discuss the following areas of inquiry:
A) When the claims referenced complaintwas first reportedto SOUTHERN
in the
FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY ("SFIC") how the claims were reported,
who reportedthe claims, to whom the claims were reported at SFIC, whether the
phone calls (ifapplicable)were recorded and the status and location of said
recordings;
*** FILED: BROWARD COUNTY, FL BRENDA D. FORMAN, CLERK 03/15/2022 03:10:43 PM.****
CASE NO.: CACE 21-007664
B) The name, company name, address and telephonenumber of all persons or
entities who were involved with the investigation
ofPlaintiff's insurance claims on
behalf of SFIC up through and includingthe date this lawsuit was filed;
C) The factual and policy-basedjustification for all assertions made by SFIC in its
letters and emails to Plaintiff and/or coverage decision during the investigationof
the insurance claims referenced by the complaint;
D) All inspectionsof Plaintiff's property, includingwho inspected the property,
what dates the property was inspected,who was present, what was done, and all
photographs or reports
generatedfollowingthe inspections;
E) All correspondence o f any kind sent to Plaintiff or her agents/attorneys
during
ofthe claims referenced by the complaint;
the investigation
F) Any and performed by SFIC or its agents/adjusters
all tests at the insured
property and whether said tests were performed in accordance with standards
governing said tests;
G) All requests made during the investigation
to Plaintiff o f the claims, including
who made said requests, the date ofthe requests, the manner in which the requests
were made (i.
e., verbal,letter,email),and whether the requests were fulfilled;
H) All documents, emails or communications o f any kind whatsoever received from
Plaintiff,Plaintiff's agents or representatives,
contractors, vendors, or third-parties
o f any kind in connection with the claims referenced in the complaint;
I) All third-parties
(including,but not limited to individuals,tenants, companies,
contractors, consultants, adjusters,plumbers, law enforcement, homeowners
association,new property owners, hygienists,leak detection companies, mold
companies, and insurance companies) with whom SFIC communicated in any way
of
during the investigation and includingthe date this
Plaintiff's claims up to
lawsuit was filed,includingwho was involved in the communication, the date of
the communication, and the substance ofthe communication;
J) All claim notes or memorialization of any kind whatsoever generatedby SFIC
during the investigation ofthe claims wherein someone dictated or summarized a
conversation with Plaintiff or her agents/attorneys
or any third-party
witness;
K) All person(s)at SFIC involved with retainingthe field adjusterand/or contractor
who inspectedPlaintiff's property duringthe investigation ofthe claims referenced
by the complaint;
L) The recorded statement ofPlaintiff (ifany);
CASE NO.: CACE 21-007664
M) Defendant's affirmative defenses;
N) Defendant's discovery responses;
O) All policyprovisionsupon which SFIC relied when denying coverage for the
insurance claims referenced in the complaint;
P) The person or persons who drafted each letter,
email, or correspondence o f any
kind whatsoever sent to Plaintiff by SFIC during the investigationof the claims
referenced in the complaint;
Q) All Post-loss duties in the insurance policy;
R) Any estimates of damage generated by SFIC or SFIC's adjusters,agents,
contractors (including Professional Adjusting Services, Inc.), experts or
representatives-whetherbefore or after this lawsuit was filed--related to the
claims referenced in Plaintiff's complaint;
S) Any contractual or legalconditions precedent Plaintiff has allegedlyfailed to
and
fulfill;
T) Each and every fact,case, rule of law, contract, photograph,summary, statement
or document of any kind whatsoever SFIC had in its possession,whether or not it
was relied upon, when SFIC issued its coverage denial.
3 It is apparent from the areas of inquiry identified by Plaintiff in the Notice that
Plaintiff seeks to elicit testimony from Defendant's corporate regardinginformation
representative
and documents contained within Defendant's claim file and or that are wholly irrelevant to a first
part lawsuit for insurance benefits.
4. Rule 1.280(b)(1)(1),
Florida Rules o f Civil Procedure providesin pertinentpart,
"Parties may obtain discoveryregarding any matter, not privilegedthat is relevant to the subject
matter of the pending action,whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking
discoveryor the claim or defense of any other party."
5. Florida law is well-settled that an insurance company's claim file materials are
irrelevant and premature until the issue has been resolved. See State Farm
of coverage and liability
CASE NO.: CACE 21-007664
Fire & Cas. Co. v. Falido, 662 So. 2d 1012 (Fla.3 d DCA1995); Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Camara De
Comercio Latino-Americana De Los Estados Unidos, Inc., %13 So. 2d 250 (Fla.3d DCA 2002).
6. In this respect, Florida Courts have consistently
held information relatingto an
insurer's handlingof a claim is not subjectto discoveryin an action seeking a determination of
insurance policy benefits. The reason is,such information is irrelevant to the question ofwhether
the policy obligatesthe insurance company to provide the requested coverage or amount of
damages. See also, U.S. Fire Insurance Co. v. Clearwater Oaks Bank, 411 So. ld 7%3,7%4 (F\a.
2d DCA 1982) (claims files,and thus the information contained in the claims files,are not
claim for insurance
discoverable as irrelevant to the issue o f coverage or damages in a first-party
State Farm Fire
benefits); & Casualty Co. v. Valido, 662 So. 2d 1012, 1013 (Fla.3d DCA 1995)
(insurer'sclaims files,manuals, guidelines and documents concerning its claim handling
proceduresare irrelevant to first-party State Farm
coverage disputes); Ins. Co. v. O'Hearn, 975
So. 2d 633 (Fla.2d DCA 2008) (a party is not entitled to discovery of an insurer's claim file or
documents relating
to the insurer's business policies regardingthe handling of claims
or practices
in an action for insurance benefits,until the insurer's to providecoverage and damages
obligation
State Farm Florida
have been established); Ins. Co. v. Gallmon, %35 So. 2d 389 (Fla.2d DCA
2003) (claimsfiles,
investigative company policiesand
notes, underwritingfiles,
reports, adjuster
manuals, trainingmanuals, certain personnel files,sales brochures and marketing materials,
computer manuals for operating internal software and programs are irrelevant to first-party
disputesor are privilegedwork product).
7. In addition to being irrelevant,these same areas of inquiry are protectedunder
Florida law as work product.Permittingquestionsrelatingto same would irreparablyharm
Defendant as a matter of law. It is well-established Florida law that information contained in an
CASE NO.: CACE 21-007664
insurer's claim file,as well as any information regarding an insurer's general claims handling
are protectedunder the work product doctrine and therefore discovery
procedures and guidelines,
harm. Clearwater Oaks Bank, supra.; O'Hearn; State Farm Fla.
of same will cause irreparable
Ins. Co. v. Gallmon, 835 So. 2d 389 (Fla.2d DCA 2003);American Home Assur. Co. v. Freeland,
973 So. 2d 668 (Fla.2d DCA 2008); Balboa Ins. Co. v. Vanscooter, 526 So. 2d 779 (Fla.2d DCA
1988).
8 In Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Camara De Comercio Latino-Americana De Los Estados
Unidos, Inc., 813 So. 2d 250 (Fla.3d DCA 2002), the court refused to permit discovery from an
to claims files
insurer relating and claims handling:
When the issue of insurance coverage is unresolved and at
issue in pending court proceedings,a trial court must not
order an insurer to produce its claims files and other work
product documents....This same reasoning and authority
necessarily applies to the testimony that the [insurer]
will be asked to provide at his or her
corporate representative
deposition....The corporate representative
may testify,
but
cannot testify
as to the privileged
matters.
M at 252 (emphasis added).The Court's reasoning as to the depositionof corporate representative
can be reasonablyimputed to depositionso f the adjusteras well. It is axiomatic that you are not
what you would not be otherwise permittedthrough a request
permittedto get through a deposition,
for production.
9- Plaintiff's Notice, as written,is overbroad and implicatesthe insurance carrier's
claims handling practicesand procedures and seeks information contained within Defendant's
claim file.
10. An insurer's claim handling practicesare not discoverable until the issues of
and the amount of damages are determined. State
liability Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Falido, 662
CASE NO.: CACE 21-007664
So. 2d 1012 (Fla.3d DCA1995); State Farm Fla. Ins. Co. v. Gallmon, %35 So. 2d 389 (Fla.2d
DCA 2003).
11. While the Defendant has no objectionto the deponent bringingthe claim file to the
depositionin order to refresh his or her recollection as required,Defendant objectsto any request
to produce materials from the claim file.
12. Defendant requests a protectiveorder to limit the scope of the corporate
depositionand requests that the Court prohibitPlaintiff from posing any questions
representative
or seeking to elicit claim file,underwriting
testimony regardingDefendant's claims investigation,
business policiesor procedures.
file,
WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfullyrequests this Honorable Court grant the
Defendant's Motion for Protective Order and prohibitPlaintiff from posing any questions or
seekingto elicit claim file,underwritingfile,business
testimony regardingclaims investigation,
policiesor procedures and preventingthe disclosure o f documents sought by Plaintiffin the Notice,
as well as such other and further relief as this Court deems justand proper.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 15th day o f March, 2022, this document was filed using
the Florida Courts E-FilingPortal. This document is being served on all counsel and pro se parties
o f record by the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal,pursuant to and in compliance with Fla. R. Jud.
Admin. 2.516. The mailing and electronic addresses of Plaintiffs counsel are: Dean R. Mallett,
Esquire, GUTTERMAN TRIAL GROUP, 200 East Broward Boulevard, Suite 1630, Fort
Lauderdale, FL 33301, (754) 218-8255/(754) 218-8259 (F).
CASE NO.: CACE 21-007664
KELLEY KRONENBERG
/d Todd A. Schwartz
Todd A. Schwartz, Esq.
Fla. Bar No.. 118417
tschwartz@kelleykronenberg.com
Jeffrey M. Wank, Esq.
Fla. Bar No.. 68010
jwank@kelleykronenberg.com
10360 West State Road 84
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33324
Telephone: (954) 370-9970
Facsimile: (954) 382-1988
Attorneys for Defendant
Address for service ofpleadings only
jwank@kelleykronenberg.com
tschwartz@kelleykronenberg.com
lsorescu@kelleykronenberg.com
Filing# 144530841 E-Filed 02/24/2022 11:23:38 AM
EXHIBIT A
108.0210
INTHE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
SEVENTEENT JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR
BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA
CASE NO: CACE-21-007664
TERESA M. EDREIRA
Plaintiff.
V
SOUTHERN FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.
i
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT'S
DESIGNATED CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE PURSUANT TO RULE 1.310(b)(6)
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff,through the undersigned counsel, will take the
deposition,by examination
oral of the following person(s)per Rule 1.310(b)(6)as indicated
below or at such other location,time, and date as is mutually agreed upon by counsel or ordered
by the Court, before an associate or deputy court reporter who is not of counsel to the partiesor
interested in the events o f this cause.
Name Date and Time Location
Any and all witnesses designated May 13, 2022 at Empire Legal
for
as corporate representative(s) 10:00 a.m
Defendant per Rule 1.310(b)(6)
regardingthe topicsand subjects
..
listed on Schedule "A.
The deposition(s) is/are being taken for the purpose of discovery,for use at trial,
or for
such other purposes as are permittedunder the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. The deposition
will continue from day to day until completed.
CASE NO: CACE-21-007664
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT'S DESIGNATED CORPORATE
REPRESENTATIVE PURSUANT TO RULE 1.310(b)(6)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I certifythat a copy of the foregoing document has been furnished to: JeffreyM. Wank,
Esquire,Kelley Kronenberg, 10360 West State Road 84, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33324, via e-
Portal,on this 24th day of February,2022.
Service through the Florida Courts e-filing
Respectfullysubmitted,
GUTTERMAN TRIAL GROUP
Attorneys for Plaintiff
200 East Broward Boulevard, Suite 1630
Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301
Telephone: 754.218.8255
Facsimile: 754.218.8259
Primary Eservice: eservice@guttermangroup.com
By-. Dean R. Mallett
Dean R. Mallett,Esquire
Florida Bar No.. 63293
Secondary Eservice: dmallett@guttermangroup.com
2
CASE NO: CACE-21-007664
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT'S DESIGNATED CORPORATE
REPRESENTATIVE PURSUANT TO RULE 1.310(b)(6)
SCHEDULE "A"
A) When the claims referenced in the complaint was first reportedto SOUTHERN
FIDELITY
INSURANCE COMPANY("SFIC") how the claims were reported,who reportedthe claims,
to whom the claims were reportedat SFIC, whether the phone calls (ifapplicable) were
recorded and the status and location of said recordings;
B) The name, company name, address and telephone number of all persons or entities who were
involved with the investigation of Plaintiff's insurance claims on behalf of SFIC up through
and includingthe date this lawsuit was filed;
C) The factual and policy-basedjustification for all assertions made by SFIC in its letters and
emails to Plaintiff and/or coverage decision during the investigationof the insurance claims
referenced by the complaint;
D) All inspectionsof Plaintiff's property, includingwho inspectedthe property, what dates the
property was inspected,who was present, what was done, and all photographs or reports
generatedfollowingthe inspections;
E) All correspondence of any kind sent IQ Plaintiff or her agents/attorneysduring the
of the claims referenced by the complaint;
investigation
F) Any and all tests performed by SFIC or its agents/adjusters at the insured property and
whether said tests were performed in accordance with standards governingsaid tests;
G) All requests made to Plaintiff during the investigationof the claims,includingwho made said
requests, the date of the requests, the manner in which the requests were made (i.e., verbal,
letter,email), and whether the requests were fulfilled;
H) All documents, emails or communications of any kind whatsoever received from Plaintiff,
Plaintiff's agents or representatives, of any kind in
contractors, vendors, or third-parties
connection with the claims referenced in the complaint;
I) All third-parties(including, but not limited to individuals, tenants, companies, contractors,
consultants, adjusters,plumbers, law enforcement, homeowners association,new property
owners, hygienists, leak detection companies, mold companies, and insurance companies)
with whom SFIC communicated in any way during the investigation o f Plaintiff' s claims up
to and including the date this lawsuit was filed, including who was involved in the
communication, the date o f the communication, and the substance o f the communication;
J) All claim notes or memorialization of any kind whatsoever generated by SFIC during the
investigationof the claims wherein someone dictated or summarized a conversation with
Plaintiff or her or any third-party
agents/attorneys witness;
3
CASE NO: CACE-21-007664
PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT'S DESIGNATED CORPORATE
REPRESENTATIVE PURSUANT TO RULE 1.310(b)(6)
K) All person(s) at SFIC involved with retainingthe field adjusterand/or contractor who
inspected Plaintiff" s property during the investigationof the claims referenced by the
complaint;
L) The recorded statement of Plaintiff (ifany);
M) Defendant's affirmative defenses;
N) Defendant's discoveryresponses;
O) All policy provisionsupon which SFIC relied when denying coverage for the insurance
claims referenced in the complaint;
P) The person or persons who drafted each letter,email, or correspondence of any kind
whatsoever sent to Plaintiff by SFIC during the investigation
of the claims referenced in the
complaint;
Q) All Post-loss duties in the insurance policy;
R) Any estimates of damage generated by SFIC or SFIC's adjusters,agents, contractors
(includingProfessional Adjusting Services, Inc.),experts or representatives-whetherbefore
or after this lawsuit was filed--related to the claims referenced in Plaintiff's complaint;
S) Any and
contractual or legalconditions precedentPlaintiff has allegedlyfailed to fulfill;
T) Each and every fact, case, rule of law, contract, photograph, summary, statement or
document of any kind whatsoever SFIC had in its possession,whether or not it was relied
upon, when SFIC issued its coverage denial.
4
Preview
Filing# 145752945 E-Filed 03/15/2022 03:10:44 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 17TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA Case No.. CACE 21-007664 TERESA M. EDREIRA, Plaintiff, V. SOUTHERN FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. I DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER FROM DEPOSITION OF CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE Defendant, SOUTHERN FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY .., ("Defendant '), pursuant to Florida Rule o f Civil Procedure 1.280(c),and moves this Honorable Court to enter an Order and limitingthe scope ofPlaintiff"s depositionofDefendant's corporate representative, states: 1. On February 24,2022, Plaintiff served a Notice o f Taking Videotaped Deposition Duces Tecum of Defendant's Designated Corporate Representative(the"Notice"). See Notice of Taking Videotaped Depositionattached as Exhibit "A". 2. Within the confines o f the Notice, Plaintiff requests the witness appear for and be prepared to discuss the following areas of inquiry: A) When the claims referenced complaintwas first reportedto SOUTHERN in the FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY ("SFIC") how the claims were reported, who reportedthe claims, to whom the claims were reported at SFIC, whether the phone calls (ifapplicable)were recorded and the status and location of said recordings; *** FILED: BROWARD COUNTY, FL BRENDA D. FORMAN, CLERK 03/15/2022 03:10:43 PM.**** CASE NO.: CACE 21-007664 B) The name, company name, address and telephonenumber of all persons or entities who were involved with the investigation ofPlaintiff's insurance claims on behalf of SFIC up through and includingthe date this lawsuit was filed; C) The factual and policy-basedjustification for all assertions made by SFIC in its letters and emails to Plaintiff and/or coverage decision during the investigationof the insurance claims referenced by the complaint; D) All inspectionsof Plaintiff's property, includingwho inspected the property, what dates the property was inspected,who was present, what was done, and all photographs or reports generatedfollowingthe inspections; E) All correspondence o f any kind sent to Plaintiff or her agents/attorneys during ofthe claims referenced by the complaint; the investigation F) Any and performed by SFIC or its agents/adjusters all tests at the insured property and whether said tests were performed in accordance with standards governing said tests; G) All requests made during the investigation to Plaintiff o f the claims, including who made said requests, the date ofthe requests, the manner in which the requests were made (i. e., verbal,letter,email),and whether the requests were fulfilled; H) All documents, emails or communications o f any kind whatsoever received from Plaintiff,Plaintiff's agents or representatives, contractors, vendors, or third-parties o f any kind in connection with the claims referenced in the complaint; I) All third-parties (including,but not limited to individuals,tenants, companies, contractors, consultants, adjusters,plumbers, law enforcement, homeowners association,new property owners, hygienists,leak detection companies, mold companies, and insurance companies) with whom SFIC communicated in any way of during the investigation and includingthe date this Plaintiff's claims up to lawsuit was filed,includingwho was involved in the communication, the date of the communication, and the substance ofthe communication; J) All claim notes or memorialization of any kind whatsoever generatedby SFIC during the investigation ofthe claims wherein someone dictated or summarized a conversation with Plaintiff or her agents/attorneys or any third-party witness; K) All person(s)at SFIC involved with retainingthe field adjusterand/or contractor who inspectedPlaintiff's property duringthe investigation ofthe claims referenced by the complaint; L) The recorded statement ofPlaintiff (ifany); CASE NO.: CACE 21-007664 M) Defendant's affirmative defenses; N) Defendant's discovery responses; O) All policyprovisionsupon which SFIC relied when denying coverage for the insurance claims referenced in the complaint; P) The person or persons who drafted each letter, email, or correspondence o f any kind whatsoever sent to Plaintiff by SFIC during the investigationof the claims referenced in the complaint; Q) All Post-loss duties in the insurance policy; R) Any estimates of damage generated by SFIC or SFIC's adjusters,agents, contractors (including Professional Adjusting Services, Inc.), experts or representatives-whetherbefore or after this lawsuit was filed--related to the claims referenced in Plaintiff's complaint; S) Any contractual or legalconditions precedent Plaintiff has allegedlyfailed to and fulfill; T) Each and every fact,case, rule of law, contract, photograph,summary, statement or document of any kind whatsoever SFIC had in its possession,whether or not it was relied upon, when SFIC issued its coverage denial. 3 It is apparent from the areas of inquiry identified by Plaintiff in the Notice that Plaintiff seeks to elicit testimony from Defendant's corporate regardinginformation representative and documents contained within Defendant's claim file and or that are wholly irrelevant to a first part lawsuit for insurance benefits. 4. Rule 1.280(b)(1)(1), Florida Rules o f Civil Procedure providesin pertinentpart, "Parties may obtain discoveryregarding any matter, not privilegedthat is relevant to the subject matter of the pending action,whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discoveryor the claim or defense of any other party." 5. Florida law is well-settled that an insurance company's claim file materials are irrelevant and premature until the issue has been resolved. See State Farm of coverage and liability CASE NO.: CACE 21-007664 Fire & Cas. Co. v. Falido, 662 So. 2d 1012 (Fla.3 d DCA1995); Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Camara De Comercio Latino-Americana De Los Estados Unidos, Inc., %13 So. 2d 250 (Fla.3d DCA 2002). 6. In this respect, Florida Courts have consistently held information relatingto an insurer's handlingof a claim is not subjectto discoveryin an action seeking a determination of insurance policy benefits. The reason is,such information is irrelevant to the question ofwhether the policy obligatesthe insurance company to provide the requested coverage or amount of damages. See also, U.S. Fire Insurance Co. v. Clearwater Oaks Bank, 411 So. ld 7%3,7%4 (F\a. 2d DCA 1982) (claims files,and thus the information contained in the claims files,are not claim for insurance discoverable as irrelevant to the issue o f coverage or damages in a first-party State Farm Fire benefits); & Casualty Co. v. Valido, 662 So. 2d 1012, 1013 (Fla.3d DCA 1995) (insurer'sclaims files,manuals, guidelines and documents concerning its claim handling proceduresare irrelevant to first-party State Farm coverage disputes); Ins. Co. v. O'Hearn, 975 So. 2d 633 (Fla.2d DCA 2008) (a party is not entitled to discovery of an insurer's claim file or documents relating to the insurer's business policies regardingthe handling of claims or practices in an action for insurance benefits,until the insurer's to providecoverage and damages obligation State Farm Florida have been established); Ins. Co. v. Gallmon, %35 So. 2d 389 (Fla.2d DCA 2003) (claimsfiles, investigative company policiesand notes, underwritingfiles, reports, adjuster manuals, trainingmanuals, certain personnel files,sales brochures and marketing materials, computer manuals for operating internal software and programs are irrelevant to first-party disputesor are privilegedwork product). 7. In addition to being irrelevant,these same areas of inquiry are protectedunder Florida law as work product.Permittingquestionsrelatingto same would irreparablyharm Defendant as a matter of law. It is well-established Florida law that information contained in an CASE NO.: CACE 21-007664 insurer's claim file,as well as any information regarding an insurer's general claims handling are protectedunder the work product doctrine and therefore discovery procedures and guidelines, harm. Clearwater Oaks Bank, supra.; O'Hearn; State Farm Fla. of same will cause irreparable Ins. Co. v. Gallmon, 835 So. 2d 389 (Fla.2d DCA 2003);American Home Assur. Co. v. Freeland, 973 So. 2d 668 (Fla.2d DCA 2008); Balboa Ins. Co. v. Vanscooter, 526 So. 2d 779 (Fla.2d DCA 1988). 8 In Scottsdale Ins. Co. v. Camara De Comercio Latino-Americana De Los Estados Unidos, Inc., 813 So. 2d 250 (Fla.3d DCA 2002), the court refused to permit discovery from an to claims files insurer relating and claims handling: When the issue of insurance coverage is unresolved and at issue in pending court proceedings,a trial court must not order an insurer to produce its claims files and other work product documents....This same reasoning and authority necessarily applies to the testimony that the [insurer] will be asked to provide at his or her corporate representative deposition....The corporate representative may testify, but cannot testify as to the privileged matters. M at 252 (emphasis added).The Court's reasoning as to the depositionof corporate representative can be reasonablyimputed to depositionso f the adjusteras well. It is axiomatic that you are not what you would not be otherwise permittedthrough a request permittedto get through a deposition, for production. 9- Plaintiff's Notice, as written,is overbroad and implicatesthe insurance carrier's claims handling practicesand procedures and seeks information contained within Defendant's claim file. 10. An insurer's claim handling practicesare not discoverable until the issues of and the amount of damages are determined. State liability Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Falido, 662 CASE NO.: CACE 21-007664 So. 2d 1012 (Fla.3d DCA1995); State Farm Fla. Ins. Co. v. Gallmon, %35 So. 2d 389 (Fla.2d DCA 2003). 11. While the Defendant has no objectionto the deponent bringingthe claim file to the depositionin order to refresh his or her recollection as required,Defendant objectsto any request to produce materials from the claim file. 12. Defendant requests a protectiveorder to limit the scope of the corporate depositionand requests that the Court prohibitPlaintiff from posing any questions representative or seeking to elicit claim file,underwriting testimony regardingDefendant's claims investigation, business policiesor procedures. file, WHEREFORE, Defendant respectfullyrequests this Honorable Court grant the Defendant's Motion for Protective Order and prohibitPlaintiff from posing any questions or seekingto elicit claim file,underwritingfile,business testimony regardingclaims investigation, policiesor procedures and preventingthe disclosure o f documents sought by Plaintiffin the Notice, as well as such other and further relief as this Court deems justand proper. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 15th day o f March, 2022, this document was filed using the Florida Courts E-FilingPortal. This document is being served on all counsel and pro se parties o f record by the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal,pursuant to and in compliance with Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.516. The mailing and electronic addresses of Plaintiffs counsel are: Dean R. Mallett, Esquire, GUTTERMAN TRIAL GROUP, 200 East Broward Boulevard, Suite 1630, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301, (754) 218-8255/(754) 218-8259 (F). CASE NO.: CACE 21-007664 KELLEY KRONENBERG /d Todd A. Schwartz Todd A. Schwartz, Esq. Fla. Bar No.. 118417 tschwartz@kelleykronenberg.com Jeffrey M. Wank, Esq. Fla. Bar No.. 68010 jwank@kelleykronenberg.com 10360 West State Road 84 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33324 Telephone: (954) 370-9970 Facsimile: (954) 382-1988 Attorneys for Defendant Address for service ofpleadings only jwank@kelleykronenberg.com tschwartz@kelleykronenberg.com lsorescu@kelleykronenberg.com Filing# 144530841 E-Filed 02/24/2022 11:23:38 AM EXHIBIT A 108.0210 INTHE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTEENT JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO: CACE-21-007664 TERESA M. EDREIRA Plaintiff. V SOUTHERN FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. i PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT'S DESIGNATED CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE PURSUANT TO RULE 1.310(b)(6) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Plaintiff,through the undersigned counsel, will take the deposition,by examination oral of the following person(s)per Rule 1.310(b)(6)as indicated below or at such other location,time, and date as is mutually agreed upon by counsel or ordered by the Court, before an associate or deputy court reporter who is not of counsel to the partiesor interested in the events o f this cause. Name Date and Time Location Any and all witnesses designated May 13, 2022 at Empire Legal for as corporate representative(s) 10:00 a.m Defendant per Rule 1.310(b)(6) regardingthe topicsand subjects .. listed on Schedule "A. The deposition(s) is/are being taken for the purpose of discovery,for use at trial, or for such other purposes as are permittedunder the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. The deposition will continue from day to day until completed. CASE NO: CACE-21-007664 PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT'S DESIGNATED CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE PURSUANT TO RULE 1.310(b)(6) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certifythat a copy of the foregoing document has been furnished to: JeffreyM. Wank, Esquire,Kelley Kronenberg, 10360 West State Road 84, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33324, via e- Portal,on this 24th day of February,2022. Service through the Florida Courts e-filing Respectfullysubmitted, GUTTERMAN TRIAL GROUP Attorneys for Plaintiff 200 East Broward Boulevard, Suite 1630 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301 Telephone: 754.218.8255 Facsimile: 754.218.8259 Primary Eservice: eservice@guttermangroup.com By-. Dean R. Mallett Dean R. Mallett,Esquire Florida Bar No.. 63293 Secondary Eservice: dmallett@guttermangroup.com 2 CASE NO: CACE-21-007664 PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT'S DESIGNATED CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE PURSUANT TO RULE 1.310(b)(6) SCHEDULE "A" A) When the claims referenced in the complaint was first reportedto SOUTHERN FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY("SFIC") how the claims were reported,who reportedthe claims, to whom the claims were reportedat SFIC, whether the phone calls (ifapplicable) were recorded and the status and location of said recordings; B) The name, company name, address and telephone number of all persons or entities who were involved with the investigation of Plaintiff's insurance claims on behalf of SFIC up through and includingthe date this lawsuit was filed; C) The factual and policy-basedjustification for all assertions made by SFIC in its letters and emails to Plaintiff and/or coverage decision during the investigationof the insurance claims referenced by the complaint; D) All inspectionsof Plaintiff's property, includingwho inspectedthe property, what dates the property was inspected,who was present, what was done, and all photographs or reports generatedfollowingthe inspections; E) All correspondence of any kind sent IQ Plaintiff or her agents/attorneysduring the of the claims referenced by the complaint; investigation F) Any and all tests performed by SFIC or its agents/adjusters at the insured property and whether said tests were performed in accordance with standards governingsaid tests; G) All requests made to Plaintiff during the investigationof the claims,includingwho made said requests, the date of the requests, the manner in which the requests were made (i.e., verbal, letter,email), and whether the requests were fulfilled; H) All documents, emails or communications of any kind whatsoever received from Plaintiff, Plaintiff's agents or representatives, of any kind in contractors, vendors, or third-parties connection with the claims referenced in the complaint; I) All third-parties(including, but not limited to individuals, tenants, companies, contractors, consultants, adjusters,plumbers, law enforcement, homeowners association,new property owners, hygienists, leak detection companies, mold companies, and insurance companies) with whom SFIC communicated in any way during the investigation o f Plaintiff' s claims up to and including the date this lawsuit was filed, including who was involved in the communication, the date o f the communication, and the substance o f the communication; J) All claim notes or memorialization of any kind whatsoever generated by SFIC during the investigationof the claims wherein someone dictated or summarized a conversation with Plaintiff or her or any third-party agents/attorneys witness; 3 CASE NO: CACE-21-007664 PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF TAKING DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT'S DESIGNATED CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE PURSUANT TO RULE 1.310(b)(6) K) All person(s) at SFIC involved with retainingthe field adjusterand/or contractor who inspected Plaintiff" s property during the investigationof the claims referenced by the complaint; L) The recorded statement of Plaintiff (ifany); M) Defendant's affirmative defenses; N) Defendant's discoveryresponses; O) All policy provisionsupon which SFIC relied when denying coverage for the insurance claims referenced in the complaint; P) The person or persons who drafted each letter,email, or correspondence of any kind whatsoever sent to Plaintiff by SFIC during the investigation of the claims referenced in the complaint; Q) All Post-loss duties in the insurance policy; R) Any estimates of damage generated by SFIC or SFIC's adjusters,agents, contractors (includingProfessional Adjusting Services, Inc.),experts or representatives-whetherbefore or after this lawsuit was filed--related to the claims referenced in Plaintiff's complaint; S) Any and contractual or legalconditions precedentPlaintiff has allegedlyfailed to fulfill; T) Each and every fact, case, rule of law, contract, photograph, summary, statement or document of any kind whatsoever SFIC had in its possession,whether or not it was relied upon, when SFIC issued its coverage denial. 4