Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2015

Petri Positive Pest Control, Inc. v. CCM Condominium Association, Inc. d/b/a Country Club Manor Condominium Association

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided September 24, 2015 · Stevenson, Gross, Forst

174 So. 3d 1122; 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 14074; 2015 WL 5613369 (Southern Reporter, Third Series)

Cases that cite this one

7 later published cases cite this decision.

Amazulu Transport, Inc., and Peter Stuart Welch, Jr. v. Gary Dinkins (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2025)
UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY v. RIVERSIDE MEDICAL ASSOCIATES, INC. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)
Steven Vaziri v. Marena Jerkins (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2025)
William Marvin Douberley v. Harold Peerenboom (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2023)
OMEGA TITLE NAPLES, L L C D/B/A DUNN TITLE v. ROGER BUTSCHKY (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2021)
Varnedore v. Copeland (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)
Rodriguez v. Copeland (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, Petri Positive Pest Control, Inc. (Petri), seeks certiorari relief from a November 12, 2014 order granting respondent CCM Condominium Association, Inc.’s (CCM) motion for leave to assert a punitive damages claim. See § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2014). Certiorari review is available to determine whether a trial court has complied with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, but not the sufficiency of the evidence. See Globe Newspaper Co. v. King, 658 So.2d 518, 520 (Fla. 1995).

Although the trial court held a hearing on the matter, neither the court’s verbal comments nor written order indicate whether it found that CCM demonstrated a reasonable basis for seeking punitive damages. “(W]e read section 768.72 as creating a positive legal right in a party not to be subjected to financial worth discovery until the trial court has first made an affirmative finding that there is a reasonable evidentiary basis for the punitive damages claim to go to the jury.” Henn v. Sandler, 589 So.2d 1334, 1335 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (emphasis added). We quash the order on review and remand for the trial court to enter its affirmative findings or, if necessary, hold further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

STEVENSON, GROSS and FORST, JJ., concur.

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