Appellate Victory in Fourth District Court of Appeal

Fort Lauderdale West Associate Amanda Wasserman and Partner Michael Rosenberg received an appellate victory in the Fourth District Court of Appeal.

The case was brought by the Appellants, who alleged negligence after a maintenance issue on the property. The ruling clarified important legal standards surrounding affirmative defenses and evidentiary requirements in negligence claims.

The Appellants sued both the condominium association and its maintenance company (the Appellees), claiming they were responsible for damages due to poor maintenance. During the litigation, the condo association raised what’s known as a Fabre defense—a legal strategy that shifts some blame to another party, in this case, the maintenance company.

The Appellants argued that simply raising this defense was enough to establish liability for both Appellees. However, the court firmly disagreed.

The appellate court emphasized that under Florida law, pleadings alone are not evidence. Just because a party mentions another as possibly at fault does not automatically make them liable. The court pointed out that to successfully shift or share liability using a Fabre defense, there must be actual evidence showing that the other party was negligent.

In this case, the Appellants failed to present sufficient evidence that either the condo association or the maintenance company breached any duty. This lack of evidence resulted in the trial court granting a summary judgment.

The Appellants also claimed that the maintenance company should not have been granted summary judgment because it did not file its own motion. However, the court noted that the maintenance company had joined the condo association’s motion during the hearing. Since the Appellants did not object at that time, they waived any right to challenge the timing or procedure of the motion later.

This procedural waiver, and Ms. Wasserman’s arguments, reinforced the court’s decision to affirm the summary judgment in favor of both Appellees.

The appellate court ruled that the trial court acted correctly in dismissing the case. The Appellants failed to provide the necessary evidence to support their negligence claims, and their procedural objections came too late to be considered.