Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2006

Escoto v. Drehobl

Escoto v. Drehobl
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided February 22, 2006 · Gersten, Ramirez, Shepherd
924 So. 2d 68; 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 2224; 2006 WL 399436 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Escoto v. Drehobl

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Pascual v. Dozier, 771 So.2d 552, 554 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); Binger v. King Pest Control, 401 So.2d 1310 (Fla. 1981)(trial court’s decision to exclude expert testimony based on improper disclosure “should be guided largely by a determination as to whether use of the undisclosed witness will prejudice the objecting party ... Prejudice in this sense refers to the surprise in fact of the objecting party ... .”)(internal citations omitted); Dos Santos v. Carlson, 806 So.2d 539 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)(reversing and remand*69ing for new trial based on improper exclusion of defendant’s radiology expert, where plaintiff knew about expert prior to trial and failed to establish unfair surprise).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.