On November 17th, the United States Supreme Court scheduled oral argument inGallardo v. Marstiller. The case is set to be heard on January 10, 2022. Creed & Gowdy and co-counsel represent Ms. Gianinna Gallardo, a Medicaid beneficiary. Ms. Gallardo's case asks the Court to decide whether a state Medicaid agency may seek reimbursement for Medicaid's payment of the beneficiary's past medical expenses by taking from the portion of the beneficiary's tort recovery that compensates for future medical expenses.
Read more here.
On November 12, 2021, Rebecca Creed and Dimitri Peteves participated in the Jacksonville Justice Association's Annual Seminar presentation, titled "Summary Judgments Under the New Rule: Offensive and Defensive Strategies." Rebecca served as a moderator for the presentation and Dimitri was a panelist.
On October 26, 2021, the Supreme Court of Florida issued an Administrative Order, making appointments to the Supreme Court Committee on Standard Jury Instructions in Civil Cases. The court appointed Daniel B. Rogers of Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP as Chair of the committee and Bryan S. Gowdy of Creed & Gowdy as Vice-Chair of the committee for 2022.
On October 22, Bryan Gowdy, along with Thomas Hall, gave the keynote address at the William A. Van Nortwick, Jr. 2021 Presentation of the Pins Pro Bono Celebration, presented by the Fourth Circuit Pro Bono and the Jacksonville Bar Association Pro Bono Committees. Mr. Gowdy's and Mr. Hall's presentation was a "Discussion of Florida's Interest on Trust Accounts (IOTA) Program." The yearly event celebrates local attorneys who have provided 20 hours or more of volunteer civil legal services in the previous calendar year.
To view the event agenda and honorees, click here. To watch the celebration, click here.
On October 14, 2021, the Florida Supreme Court issued opinions in Younkin v. Blackwelder (SC19-385) and Dodgen v. Grijalva (SC19-1118). In both cases, Creed & Gowdy submitted amicus curiae briefs on behalf of the Florida Justice Association (FJA) in support of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs and the FJA argued that the financial relationship between a defendant's law firm or insurer and a retained expert witness was discoverable. In opposition, the defendants argued such discovery was prohibited by the rationale of Worley v. Central Florida Young Men's Christian Ass'n, a decision of the Florida Supreme Court that prohibited discovery between a plaintiff's law firm and a plaintiff's treating physician. While the defendants were urging the Court to extend Worley's rationale to different factual circumstances, some amici supporting the defendants urged the Court to overrule Worley. The FJA argued the Court lacked the authority to either extend or overrule Worley: "This Court must decide this case, and only this case, based on the facts of this case, and it may not decide abstract questions of law or issue advisory opinions." Dodgen FJA Amicus Br. 2. The Court ultimately agreed with the FJA's argument: "[W]hether Worley was wrongly decided or whether some other factor has caused the purportedly uneven playing field [between plaintiffs and defendants], is not properly before us. The holding of Worley should be reexamined only in a case in which it is actually at issue." Dodgen Op. 15.
The opinions and briefs can be found on the Court's docket: Younkin and Dodgen.