Zone of Risk

Co-host Jennifer Opiola joined Robert to review recent PIP and insurance law opinions issued by the Florida DCAs.

• Allstate Ins. Co. v. Revival Chiropractic, LLC., FSC (PIP fee schedule); see also Progressive American Ins. Co., v. Express Care of Belleview, 5th DCA). 
• Finell v. Florida Ins. Guar. Ass'n, Inc., 4th DCA (EUOs).
• HCA Health Servs. of Fla., Inc. v. Jo Ann Berlin, M.D., 4th DCA (jurisdiction; fee hearings).
• Lassiter v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Co., 2d DCA (SMJ; dueling affidavits). 
• Hamilton v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 3d DCA (cert review of discovery order; depos; refreshing recollection; privilege).  
• Cent. Fla. Med. & Chiropractic Ctr. v. Mendota Ins. Co., 5th DCA (PIP suit over $0.02). 

Update: Conflict certified in Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Laguna Riviera Condo. Ass'n Inc., 2d DCA with Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Grove Isle at Vero Beach Condo. Ass'n, 4th DCA (retroactivity of statute).

Our Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to [email protected].

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services.  The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice.  You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer.  The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers.  This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only.  Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

This is a special edition to explore the Supreme Court's opinion in Trump v. United States, the presidential immunity case. The Supreme Court granted former presidents absolute immunity from criminal prosecution for actions within his "conclusive and preclusive constitutional authority," and presumptive immunity from prosecution for all his official acts. The devil is in the details.

I spoke with Professor Harold Krent from the Chicago-Kent College of Law, and former federal prosecutor David Weinstein, a partner at Jones Walker. Hal and I talked about the merits of the opinion, and David and I discussed what the opinion means for the 3 open criminal cases against the former president.

Our Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to [email protected].

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services.  The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice.  You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer.  The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers.  This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only.  Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

Jury selection is the most important part of a trial. Many cases are won and lost during jury selection. On this episode, Robert and special guest host Joni Mosely spoke with Dr. Melissa Pigott about the psychology of jury selection and why it is important to understand prospective jurors’ values, attitudes, and beliefs.

This episode is approved by The Florida Bar for 1 hour of general CLE credit. The course number is provided towards the end of the episode.

Dr. Pigott is a nationally recognized social psychologist and is considered one of the foremost experts in jury, litigation, and ADR research. She is the co-founder and director of research of Magnus Research Consultants. Dr. Pigott has selected more than 200 juries and performed thousands of hours of mock jury studies.

Our Sponsors

This podcast is supported by Stafi. Stafi provides trained, vetted, and experienced virtual legal assistants and paralegals who will take routine tasks off your plate so you can focus on growing your firm and maximizing revenue. SAVE $500 off your first month with Stafi by using referral code Summarily when you schedule your free initial consultation. Go to getstafi.com/schedule-a-call, select the date and time for your consultation, and enter referral code Summarily on the event details page.

This podcast is also sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Use the link BetterHelp.com/Summarily for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to [email protected].

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services.  The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice.  You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer.  The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers.  This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only.  Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

Robert spoke with Professor Courtney Cahill about the recent Florida Supreme Court opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Florida. The court held that the Florida Constitution's privacy provision does not protect a woman's right to have an abortion. The U.S. Supreme Court's opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization played a major role in the Florida Supreme Court's analysis. 

Professor Cahill is the Chancellor’s Professor of Law and the University of California, Irvine School of Law. Professor Cahill is a scholar of constitutional law, anti-discrimination law, sex equality, and LGBTQ equality. Her forthcoming projects include a series of essays on constitutional sex equality—including the constitutional sex equality argument for abortion. She is also working on a new book called Busted, which will explore the vast network of laws that subject girls and women to criminal penalties for going topless in public and sometimes in the home.

Thank you for listening. Please share the podcast with your friends and colleagues, and rate and review the show.

Summarily is sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Click the BetterHelp link (BetterHelp.com/Summarily) for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to [email protected].

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services.  The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice.  You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer.  The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers.  This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only.  Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

Robert and Lindsey break down a bunch of appellate opinions. The criminal opinions begin at 25:45.

CIVIL OPINIONS
Neighborhood Restaurant Partners v. Wolff, 5th DCA (improper comment; mistrial; bar referral).
Haslauer v. Haslauer, 1st DCA (61.16 fees).
The Walsh Grp. v. Zion Jacksonville, 5th DCA (striking supplemental authority).
Guardianship of Jacquelyn Anne Faircloth v. Main St. Ent., Inc, FSC (comparative fault; dram-shop law).
Dunmar Est. Homeowner’s Ass'n v. Rembert, 5th DCA (compliance with statutory requirement to mediate before suit; certiorari).
Lee County v. Dean Wish, LLC, 6th DCA (cf. signal).

CRIMINAL OPINIONS
Gullo v. State, 5th DCA (min mans; consecutive sentences).
R.V. v. State, 3d DCA (authentication; pictorial testimony theory; silent-witness theory).
Stafford v. State, 5th DCA (improper comment in closing).
Paese v. State, 4th DCA (stand-your-ground immunity).

Thank you for listening. Please share the podcast with your friends and colleagues, and rate and review the show.

Summarily is sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Click the BetterHelp link (BetterHelp.com/Summarily) for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to [email protected].

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services.  The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice.  You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer.  The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers.  This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only.  Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

The testimony is over in the NY criminal trial against defendant Trump. The jury will hear closing arguments next week and begin deliberations. But questions remain. What will the jury be asked to decide? Will the verdict form include the lesser-include offense of falsifying business records in the second degree? Both sides have a strategic decision to make.

Robert sat down the retired NY Supreme Court Justice Ethan Greenberg to talk about these and other unresolved legal issues in the case. Ethan is a shareholder at Anderson Kill in New York, where he co-chairs the firm’s Government Enforcement, Internal Investigation and White-Collar Defense Practice Group. His most recent piece in the WSJ, published on May 19, is entitled The Big Decision Before the Trump Verdict: Whether the jury weighs misdemeanor charges could affect both the outcome and the appeal.

Thank you for listening. Please share the podcast with your friends and colleagues, and rate and review the show.

Summarily is sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Click the BetterHelp link (BetterHelp.com/Summarily) for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to [email protected].

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services.  The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice.  You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer.  The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers.  This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only.  Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

Robert had the pleasure of sitting down with the estimable Roger Parloff to discuss the unending delays in the classified documents case against the former president. Roger and Robert also talked about the latest in the Manhattan case against defendant Trump.

Roger is an award-winning journalist and a senior editor of Lawfare. He has his fingers on the pulse of the classified documents case and he, along with the rest of the team at Lawfare, have a series of ongoing episodes called Trump’s Trials and Tribulations. In the N.Y. Dispatch episodes, Lawfare covers the day-to-day happenings in the Manhattan case and provides first-hand accounts of witness testimony in the case.

Thank you for listening. Please share the podcast with your friends and colleagues, and rate and review the show.

Summarily is sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Click the BetterHelp link (BetterHelp.com/Summarily) for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to [email protected].

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services.  The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice.  You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer.  The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers.  This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only.  Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

On April 24th, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in United States v. Trump. The questions presented is "whether and if so to what extent does a former President enjoy presidential immunity from criminal prosecution for conduct alleged to involve official acts during his tenure in office."

Professor Harold Krent of the Chicago-Kent College of Law joined Robert to discuss the oral argument and what the justices were interested in. Professor Krent's expertise includes appellate courts; constitutional law; courts and judges; and the U.S. Supreme Court.

OA audio and transcript.

Thank you for listening. Please share the podcast with your friends and colleagues, and rate and review the show.

Summarily is sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Click the BetterHelp link (BetterHelp.com/Summarily) for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to [email protected].

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services.  The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice.  You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer.  The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers.  This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only.  Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

How did the Supreme Court become so powerful? Dr. Ben Johnson contends that a "little-known rule change" and the Court's unkept promise in 1928 are to blame.

Dr. Johnson is an associate professor of law at the University of Florida Levin College of Law. He sat down with Robert to talk about the Court's question-selection process and how being able to "cherry-pick" legal questions has "transform[ed] the Court from a tribunal deciding cases into a super-legislator with little accountability."

Dr. Johnson has written on this topic in the Columbia Law Review and for The Atlantic.

Dr. Johnson and Robert also discussed originalism and how the current conservative justices on the Court have been unfaithful to the "history and tradition" approach they so frequently espouse.

Thank you for listening. Please share the podcast with your friends and colleagues, and rate and review the show.

Summarily is sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Click the BetterHelp link (BetterHelp.com/Summarily) for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to [email protected].

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services.  The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice.  You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer.  The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers.  This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only.  Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com

Co-host Jennifer Opiola joined Robert to review PIP and insurance opinions issued by the Florida DCAs in March.

• Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., v. laguna Riviera Condo. Ass’n, Inc., 2D DCA (retroactivity of § 627.714(4)). 
• Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Avril and Romain, 4th DCA (deductible as an affirmative defense).
• Arway v. Progressive Amer. Ins. Co., 6th DCA (statute of limitations defeated by policy language).
• Envision Physical Therapy, Inc. v. Geico Gen. Ins. Co., 3d DCA (exhaustion and bad faith). 

Summarily is sponsored by BetterHelp and The Law Office of Scott N. Richardson, P.A. Click the BetterHelp link (BetterHelp.com/Summarily) for 10% off your first month of BetterHelp.

Thank you for listening. Please share the podcast with your friends and colleagues, and rate and review the show.

Send your questions, comments, and feedback to [email protected].

Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational purposes only and is not an advertisement for legal services.  The information provided on this podcast is not intended to be legal advice.  You should not rely on what you hear on this podcast as legal advice. If you have a legal issue, please contact a lawyer.  The views and opinion expressed by the hosts and guests are solely those of the individuals and do not represent the views or opinions of the firms or organizations with which they are affiliated or the views or opinions of this podcast’s advertisers.  This podcast is available for private, non-commercial use only.  Any editing, reproduction, or redistribution of this podcast for commercial use or monetary gain without the expressed, written consent of the podcast’s creator is prohibited.

🔗 Connect with the Hosts:
Joni Mosely – TheMoselyFirm.com
Spencer Charif – CharifLaw.com