Preview
Filing # 122239152 E-Filed 03/01/2021 01:09:51 PM
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA
FRANCES BARONE & GABRIEL BARONE,
Plaintiffs,
vs. Case No. 2017-CA-003882-O
ASHFORD TRS WQ LLC, a foreign limited
liability company d/b/a WORLD QUEST
RESORT a/k/a WORLDQUEST ORLANDO
RESORT, ASHFORD WQ LICENSEE, LLC,
a foreign limited liability company, ASHFORD
TRS CORPORATION, a foreign profit
corporation, WQ HOTEL MANAGEMENT LLC,
a foreign limited liability company,
WORLDQUEST RESORT CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida not for profit
corporation,
Defendants.
________________________________/
DEFENDANT’S, WORLDQUEST RESORT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC.,
ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT
Defendant, WORLDQUEST RESORT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. (the
“Association”), by and through its undersigned counsel and pursuant to Florida Rules of Civil
Procedure 1.100, 1.110 and 1.140, hereby submits its Answer and Affirmative Defenses to
Plaintiff’s Fourth Amended Complaint and states:
1. The Association admits only that Plaintiff has alleged the grounds upon which this
Court’s subject matter jurisdiction depends. Any other allegations in Paragraph No. 1, whether
express or implied, are denied.
2. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No.
2 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them.
Page 1 of 9
3. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No.
3 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them.
4. The Association admits that it was an active not for profit corporation registered to
do business in the State of Florida on October 2, 2016. The Association denies that it owned the
fictitious name and that it was doing business as WorldQuest Resort. The Association admits only
that 8849 WorldQuest Boulevard, Orlando, Florida 32821 is the business address for the
Association’s management company. The Association, based upon review of records on file with
the Florida Secretary of State, Division of Corporations, admits that Defendant, ASHFORD TRS
WQ LLC, was an active limited liability company registered to do business in the State of Florida
and was the registered owner of the fictitious name World Quest Resort on October 2, 2016. The
Association, based upon review of records on file with the Florida Secretary of State, Division of
Corporations, admits that Defendant, ASHFORD WQ LICENSEE, LLC, was an active limited
liability company registered to do business in the State of Florida on October 2, 2016. The
Association, based upon review of records on file with the Florida Secretary of State, Division of
Corporations, admits that Defendant, ASHFORD TRS CORPORATION, was an active
corporation registered to do business in the State of Florida on October 2, 2016. The Association,
based upon review of records on file with the Florida Secretary of State, Division of Corporations,
admits that Defendant, WQ HOTEL MANAGEMENT LLC, was an active limited liability
company registered to do business in the State of Florida on October 2, 2016. Any other
allegations in Paragraph No. 4, whether express or implied, are denied.
5. The Association admits that venue is appropriate before the Ninth Judicial Circuit
based on the allegations in the Fourth Amended Complaint. Any other allegations in Paragraph
No. 5, whether express or implied, are denied.
Page 2 of 9
6. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No.
6 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them.
COUNT I – NEGLIGENCE OF WORLD QUEST DEFENDANTS
7. The Association restates and reasserts its answers to Paragraph No. 1-6 as though
fully set forth herein.
8. The Association denies that it owns or owned the property located at 8849
WorldQuest Boulevard, Orlando, Florida 32821. The Association admits that it operated and
maintained a portion of the property commonly known as WorldQuest Resort to the extent
prescribed by and subject to the terms, conditions, and limitations set forth in the Declaration of
Condominium and its agreement with the property manager at the time of the incident alleged in
the Fourth Amended Complaint. The Association admits, upon review of records on file with the
Orange County Property Appraiser and Orange County Comptroller, that Defendant, ASHFORD
WQ LICENSEE LLC, owned the property located at 8849 WorldQuest Boulevard, Orlando,
Florida 32821. The Association is without knowledge and therefore denies whether Defendants,
ASHFORD WQ LICENSEE LLC, ASHFORD WQ LICENSEE, LLC, ASHFORD TRS
CORPORATION, and/or WQ HOTEL MANAGEMENT LLC, operated and maintained a resort
hotel facility in Orange County, Florida, or any part thereof, known as “WorldQuest Orlando
Resort.” Any other allegations in Paragraph No. 8, whether express or implied, are denied.
9. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No.
9 of the Complaint and therefore denies them.
10a-d. The Association admits only that it owed such duty(ies) as may be prescribed by
applicable Florida law under the circumstances present at the time and place of the incident
described in the Fourth Amended Complaint and subject to the terms, conditions, and limitations
Page 3 of 9
set forth in the Declaration of Condominium and the Association’s agreement with the property
manager at the time of the incident alleged in the Fourth Amended Complaint. Any other
allegations in Paragraph No. 10, whether express or implied, are denied.
11a-d. The Association denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 11a-d as to the
Association. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations as to the other Defendants
and therefore denies any other allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 11 of the Fourth Amended
Complaint.
12a-d. The Association denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 12a-d as to the
Association. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations as to the other Defendants
and therefore denies any other allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 12 of the Fourth Amended
Complaint.
13a-i. The Association denies that it was careless and negligent. The Association is
otherwise without knowledge of the remaining allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 13 of the
Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them.
14. The Association denies that it was careless and negligent. The Association is
otherwise without knowledge of the remaining allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 14 of the
Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them.
15. The Association denies that it was careless and negligent. The Association is
otherwise without knowledge of the remaining allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 15 of the
Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them.
COUNT II - LOSS OF CONSORTIUM AS TO GABRIEL BARONE
16. The Association restates and reasserts its answers to Paragraph No. 1-15 as though
fully set forth herein.
Page 4 of 9
17. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No.
17 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them.
18. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No.
18 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them.
19. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No.
19 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
1. As its First Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiff’s damages, if
any, should be reduced pursuant to the doctrine of comparative negligence because Plaintiff knew,
or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, of the hazards, dangers, potential hazards,
and potential dangers alleged in the Fourth Amended Complaint and was guilty of negligence and
it was Plaintiff’s negligence that was the sole, proximate cause or contributing cause of the incident
and the damages of which Plaintiff complains.
2. As its Second Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiff’s claims are
barred or Plaintiff’s damages, if any, should be reduced because any defective or dangerous condition,
if any, that may have existed was patent, open and obvious, or otherwise known to Plaintiff or
knowable by Plaintiff with the exercise of reasonable care and diligence such that no duty to warn
existed.
3. As its Third Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs’ claims are
barred or her/his/their damages, if any, should be reduced because, if there was a dangerous
condition located upon Defendant’s premises that caused or contributed to Plaintiff’s fall or
injuries, Defendant did not have actual or constructive knowledge of it.
4. As its Fourth Affirmative Defense, the Association states that, to the extent
Plaintiff’s claims are based on the presence of a transitory foreign substance, such claims are barred
Page 5 of 9
because Plaintiff cannot prove, by direct or circumstantial evidence, that the Association had actual
knowledge of the dangerous condition or that the dangerous condition existed for such a length of
time that, in the exercise of ordinary care, the Association should have known of the condition, or
that the condition occurred with regularity and was therefore foreseeable such that the Association
had constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition and should have taken action to remedy it.
5. As its Fifth Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs have failed
to mitigate damages as required under Florida law including, but not necessarily limited to, failure
to timely seek and/or comply with appropriate medical and/or mental health care and/or counseling
regarding Plaintiffs’ injuries and damages, and Plaintiffs’ recovery, if any, must be barred or
reduced accordingly.
6. As its Sixth Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs’ claims are
barred or her/his/their damages, if any, should be reduced to the extent of any credit or set off
available from any source whatsoever including, but not limited to, as the result of any judgment,
settlement, collection, or other payment that Plaintiff(s) has received, or will receive, from any
other party and/or non-party for all or any portion of the alleged damages in this action pursuant
to section 768.041, Florida Statutes.
7. As its Seventh Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs’ claims
are barred or her/his/their damages, if any, or should be reduced to the extent of any credit or set-
off to which the Association may be entitled for any and all payments paid or payable to Plaintiff(s)
for any damages alleged in the Complaint from any collateral source whatsoever including, but
not limited to, those permitted under section 768.76, Florida Statutes.
8. As itsEighth Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs’ claims
should be barred or her/his/their damages, if any, reduced because, if there was any negligence
Page 6 of 9
that caused or contributed to the Plaintiff’s alleged injuries, it was solely the result of negligence
on the part of third parties who were not under the care, custody, control, or supervision of this
Defendant and the liability of those third parties should be considered pursuant to Fabre v. Marin, 623
So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 1993) and its progeny. See also § 768.81(3)(a), Fla. Stat. The Association’s
investigation of this matter is ongoing and it will amend this affirmative defense to specifically identify
any third parties that should be listed on the verdict form.
9. As its Ninth Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs’ claims
should be barred or her/his/their damages, if any, reduced because her injuries and/or damages
were the result of unforeseeable, efficient, and independent intervening cause(s).
10. As its Tenth Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs’ claims
should be barred or her/his/their damages, if any, reduced because of concurring cause(s) that were
a substantial factor in causing her injuries and/or damages.
11. As it Eleventh Affirmative Defense, the Association states that it is entitled to all
rights, remedies, limitations of liability, waivers, and/or notice requirements set forth in Plaintiff’s
rental agreement, any terms and conditions governing her/his/their stay at the resort, the
Declaration of Condominium, and/or property management agreement in effect at the time of the
alleged incident.
12. The Association reserves the right to supplement and/or amend these affirmative
defenses.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
The Association hereby demands a trial by jury as to all issues so triable as a matter of
right.
WHEREFORE, Defendants, WORLDQUEST RESORT CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION, INC., demands judgment against Plaintiffs, FRANCES BARONE and
Page 7 of 9
GABRIEL BARONE, along with an award of Defendant’s attorneys’ fees and costs, and such
other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Respectfully submitted on March 1, 2021, by:
/s/Brett A. Marlowe
Brian W. Bennett, Esquire
Florida Bar No. 0104256
Brett A. Marlowe, Esquire
Florida Bar No. 0310920
BENNETT LEGAL GROUP, P.A.
214 South Lucerne Circle East, Suite 201
Orlando, Florida 32801
Phone: 407-734-4559
Fax: 407-209-1006
Email: brian@bennettlegalgroup.com (Primary)
brett@bennettlegalgroup.com (Primary)
bonnie@bennettlegalgroup.com (Secondary)
jordan@bennettlegalgroup.com (Secondary)
Attorneys for Defendant, WorldQuest Resort
Condominium Association, Inc.
Page 8 of 9
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on March 1, 2021, a true and correct copy of the foregoing was
filed with E-Portal and that E-Portal, via e-mail, will furnish a true and correct copy of the
foregoing to the following:
Anthony J. Manganiello, III, Esquire
Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen
& Ginsburg, P.A.
2033 Main Street, Suite 600
Postal Drawer 4195
Sarasota, FL 34237
amanganiello@icardmerrill.com
rgrek@icardmerrill.com
Attorney for Plaintiffs
William G.K. Smoak
Chance C. Arias
Smoak, Chistolini & Barnett, PLLC
320 W. Kennedy Blvd., 4th Floor
Tampa, FL 33606
courtdocuments@flatrialcounsel.com
Attorney for Defendants, Ashford TRS
WQ LLC d/b/a World Quest Resort,
Ashford WQ Licensee, LLC, Ashford
TRS Corporation, and WQ Hotel
Management, LLC
/s/Brett A. Marlowe
Brian W. Bennett, Esquire
Brett A. Marlowe, Esquire
Page 9 of 9
Preview
Filing # 122239152 E-Filed 03/01/2021 01:09:51 PM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA FRANCES BARONE & GABRIEL BARONE, Plaintiffs, vs. Case No. 2017-CA-003882-O ASHFORD TRS WQ LLC, a foreign limited liability company d/b/a WORLD QUEST RESORT a/k/a WORLDQUEST ORLANDO RESORT, ASHFORD WQ LICENSEE, LLC, a foreign limited liability company, ASHFORD TRS CORPORATION, a foreign profit corporation, WQ HOTEL MANAGEMENT LLC, a foreign limited liability company, WORLDQUEST RESORT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida not for profit corporation, Defendants. ________________________________/ DEFENDANT’S, WORLDQUEST RESORT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO FOURTH AMENDED COMPLAINT Defendant, WORLDQUEST RESORT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. (the “Association”), by and through its undersigned counsel and pursuant to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.100, 1.110 and 1.140, hereby submits its Answer and Affirmative Defenses to Plaintiff’s Fourth Amended Complaint and states: 1. The Association admits only that Plaintiff has alleged the grounds upon which this Court’s subject matter jurisdiction depends. Any other allegations in Paragraph No. 1, whether express or implied, are denied. 2. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 2 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them. Page 1 of 9 3. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 3 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them. 4. The Association admits that it was an active not for profit corporation registered to do business in the State of Florida on October 2, 2016. The Association denies that it owned the fictitious name and that it was doing business as WorldQuest Resort. The Association admits only that 8849 WorldQuest Boulevard, Orlando, Florida 32821 is the business address for the Association’s management company. The Association, based upon review of records on file with the Florida Secretary of State, Division of Corporations, admits that Defendant, ASHFORD TRS WQ LLC, was an active limited liability company registered to do business in the State of Florida and was the registered owner of the fictitious name World Quest Resort on October 2, 2016. The Association, based upon review of records on file with the Florida Secretary of State, Division of Corporations, admits that Defendant, ASHFORD WQ LICENSEE, LLC, was an active limited liability company registered to do business in the State of Florida on October 2, 2016. The Association, based upon review of records on file with the Florida Secretary of State, Division of Corporations, admits that Defendant, ASHFORD TRS CORPORATION, was an active corporation registered to do business in the State of Florida on October 2, 2016. The Association, based upon review of records on file with the Florida Secretary of State, Division of Corporations, admits that Defendant, WQ HOTEL MANAGEMENT LLC, was an active limited liability company registered to do business in the State of Florida on October 2, 2016. Any other allegations in Paragraph No. 4, whether express or implied, are denied. 5. The Association admits that venue is appropriate before the Ninth Judicial Circuit based on the allegations in the Fourth Amended Complaint. Any other allegations in Paragraph No. 5, whether express or implied, are denied. Page 2 of 9 6. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 6 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them. COUNT I – NEGLIGENCE OF WORLD QUEST DEFENDANTS 7. The Association restates and reasserts its answers to Paragraph No. 1-6 as though fully set forth herein. 8. The Association denies that it owns or owned the property located at 8849 WorldQuest Boulevard, Orlando, Florida 32821. The Association admits that it operated and maintained a portion of the property commonly known as WorldQuest Resort to the extent prescribed by and subject to the terms, conditions, and limitations set forth in the Declaration of Condominium and its agreement with the property manager at the time of the incident alleged in the Fourth Amended Complaint. The Association admits, upon review of records on file with the Orange County Property Appraiser and Orange County Comptroller, that Defendant, ASHFORD WQ LICENSEE LLC, owned the property located at 8849 WorldQuest Boulevard, Orlando, Florida 32821. The Association is without knowledge and therefore denies whether Defendants, ASHFORD WQ LICENSEE LLC, ASHFORD WQ LICENSEE, LLC, ASHFORD TRS CORPORATION, and/or WQ HOTEL MANAGEMENT LLC, operated and maintained a resort hotel facility in Orange County, Florida, or any part thereof, known as “WorldQuest Orlando Resort.” Any other allegations in Paragraph No. 8, whether express or implied, are denied. 9. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 9 of the Complaint and therefore denies them. 10a-d. The Association admits only that it owed such duty(ies) as may be prescribed by applicable Florida law under the circumstances present at the time and place of the incident described in the Fourth Amended Complaint and subject to the terms, conditions, and limitations Page 3 of 9 set forth in the Declaration of Condominium and the Association’s agreement with the property manager at the time of the incident alleged in the Fourth Amended Complaint. Any other allegations in Paragraph No. 10, whether express or implied, are denied. 11a-d. The Association denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 11a-d as to the Association. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations as to the other Defendants and therefore denies any other allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 11 of the Fourth Amended Complaint. 12a-d. The Association denies the allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 12a-d as to the Association. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations as to the other Defendants and therefore denies any other allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 12 of the Fourth Amended Complaint. 13a-i. The Association denies that it was careless and negligent. The Association is otherwise without knowledge of the remaining allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 13 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them. 14. The Association denies that it was careless and negligent. The Association is otherwise without knowledge of the remaining allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 14 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them. 15. The Association denies that it was careless and negligent. The Association is otherwise without knowledge of the remaining allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 15 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them. COUNT II - LOSS OF CONSORTIUM AS TO GABRIEL BARONE 16. The Association restates and reasserts its answers to Paragraph No. 1-15 as though fully set forth herein. Page 4 of 9 17. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 17 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them. 18. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 18 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them. 19. The Association is without knowledge of the allegations set forth in Paragraph No. 19 of the Fourth Amended Complaint and therefore denies them. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 1. As its First Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiff’s damages, if any, should be reduced pursuant to the doctrine of comparative negligence because Plaintiff knew, or in the exercise of reasonable care should have known, of the hazards, dangers, potential hazards, and potential dangers alleged in the Fourth Amended Complaint and was guilty of negligence and it was Plaintiff’s negligence that was the sole, proximate cause or contributing cause of the incident and the damages of which Plaintiff complains. 2. As its Second Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiff’s claims are barred or Plaintiff’s damages, if any, should be reduced because any defective or dangerous condition, if any, that may have existed was patent, open and obvious, or otherwise known to Plaintiff or knowable by Plaintiff with the exercise of reasonable care and diligence such that no duty to warn existed. 3. As its Third Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs’ claims are barred or her/his/their damages, if any, should be reduced because, if there was a dangerous condition located upon Defendant’s premises that caused or contributed to Plaintiff’s fall or injuries, Defendant did not have actual or constructive knowledge of it. 4. As its Fourth Affirmative Defense, the Association states that, to the extent Plaintiff’s claims are based on the presence of a transitory foreign substance, such claims are barred Page 5 of 9 because Plaintiff cannot prove, by direct or circumstantial evidence, that the Association had actual knowledge of the dangerous condition or that the dangerous condition existed for such a length of time that, in the exercise of ordinary care, the Association should have known of the condition, or that the condition occurred with regularity and was therefore foreseeable such that the Association had constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition and should have taken action to remedy it. 5. As its Fifth Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs have failed to mitigate damages as required under Florida law including, but not necessarily limited to, failure to timely seek and/or comply with appropriate medical and/or mental health care and/or counseling regarding Plaintiffs’ injuries and damages, and Plaintiffs’ recovery, if any, must be barred or reduced accordingly. 6. As its Sixth Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs’ claims are barred or her/his/their damages, if any, should be reduced to the extent of any credit or set off available from any source whatsoever including, but not limited to, as the result of any judgment, settlement, collection, or other payment that Plaintiff(s) has received, or will receive, from any other party and/or non-party for all or any portion of the alleged damages in this action pursuant to section 768.041, Florida Statutes. 7. As its Seventh Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs’ claims are barred or her/his/their damages, if any, or should be reduced to the extent of any credit or set- off to which the Association may be entitled for any and all payments paid or payable to Plaintiff(s) for any damages alleged in the Complaint from any collateral source whatsoever including, but not limited to, those permitted under section 768.76, Florida Statutes. 8. As itsEighth Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs’ claims should be barred or her/his/their damages, if any, reduced because, if there was any negligence Page 6 of 9 that caused or contributed to the Plaintiff’s alleged injuries, it was solely the result of negligence on the part of third parties who were not under the care, custody, control, or supervision of this Defendant and the liability of those third parties should be considered pursuant to Fabre v. Marin, 623 So. 2d 1182 (Fla. 1993) and its progeny. See also § 768.81(3)(a), Fla. Stat. The Association’s investigation of this matter is ongoing and it will amend this affirmative defense to specifically identify any third parties that should be listed on the verdict form. 9. As its Ninth Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs’ claims should be barred or her/his/their damages, if any, reduced because her injuries and/or damages were the result of unforeseeable, efficient, and independent intervening cause(s). 10. As its Tenth Affirmative Defense, the Association states that Plaintiffs’ claims should be barred or her/his/their damages, if any, reduced because of concurring cause(s) that were a substantial factor in causing her injuries and/or damages. 11. As it Eleventh Affirmative Defense, the Association states that it is entitled to all rights, remedies, limitations of liability, waivers, and/or notice requirements set forth in Plaintiff’s rental agreement, any terms and conditions governing her/his/their stay at the resort, the Declaration of Condominium, and/or property management agreement in effect at the time of the alleged incident. 12. The Association reserves the right to supplement and/or amend these affirmative defenses. DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL The Association hereby demands a trial by jury as to all issues so triable as a matter of right. WHEREFORE, Defendants, WORLDQUEST RESORT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., demands judgment against Plaintiffs, FRANCES BARONE and Page 7 of 9 GABRIEL BARONE, along with an award of Defendant’s attorneys’ fees and costs, and such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper. Respectfully submitted on March 1, 2021, by: /s/Brett A. Marlowe Brian W. Bennett, Esquire Florida Bar No. 0104256 Brett A. Marlowe, Esquire Florida Bar No. 0310920 BENNETT LEGAL GROUP, P.A. 214 South Lucerne Circle East, Suite 201 Orlando, Florida 32801 Phone: 407-734-4559 Fax: 407-209-1006 Email: brian@bennettlegalgroup.com (Primary) brett@bennettlegalgroup.com (Primary) bonnie@bennettlegalgroup.com (Secondary) jordan@bennettlegalgroup.com (Secondary) Attorneys for Defendant, WorldQuest Resort Condominium Association, Inc. Page 8 of 9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on March 1, 2021, a true and correct copy of the foregoing was filed with E-Portal and that E-Portal, via e-mail, will furnish a true and correct copy of the foregoing to the following: Anthony J. Manganiello, III, Esquire Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen & Ginsburg, P.A. 2033 Main Street, Suite 600 Postal Drawer 4195 Sarasota, FL 34237 amanganiello@icardmerrill.com rgrek@icardmerrill.com Attorney for Plaintiffs William G.K. Smoak Chance C. Arias Smoak, Chistolini & Barnett, PLLC 320 W. Kennedy Blvd., 4th Floor Tampa, FL 33606 courtdocuments@flatrialcounsel.com Attorney for Defendants, Ashford TRS WQ LLC d/b/a World Quest Resort, Ashford WQ Licensee, LLC, Ashford TRS Corporation, and WQ Hotel Management, LLC /s/Brett A. Marlowe Brian W. Bennett, Esquire Brett A. Marlowe, Esquire Page 9 of 9