Stakley v. Allstate Ins. Co.
| Decision Date | 02 August 1989 |
| Docket Number | No. 89-00469,89-00469 |
| Citation | 547 So.2d 275,14 Fla. L. Weekly 1860 |
| Parties | 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1860 Jack STAKLEY and Glennis Stakley, husband and wife, Petitioners, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
David R. Linn of Goldberg, Goldstein & Buckley, P.A., Fort Myers, for petitioners.
Nancy A. Lauten and George A. Vaka of Fowler, White, Gillen, Boggs, Villareal & Banker, P.A., Tampa, for respondent.
Jack and Glennis Stakley seek a petition for writ of certiorari to review the circuit court's order prohibiting the presence of a court reporter at the compulsory physical examination of Jack Stakley. We grant the petition.
The Stakleys filed suit for underinsured motorist benefits against Allstate Insurance Company for injuries received by Jack Stakley in a motor vehicle accident. Allstate filed its motion for a compulsory physical examination of Jack Stakley, which was granted by the court. 1 The circuit judge denied the Stakleys' request that a court reporter be present at the examination. The judge stated that it was his policy to not permit court reporters to be present at such examinations. We find that the judge's blanket policy is a departure from the essential requirements of law.
Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.360 provides a means by which the court may limit the presence of third parties at examinations should their presence be harmful. Rule 1.360(a)(3) provides "[U]pon request of either party requesting the examination, or the party or person to be examined, the court may establish protective rules governing such examination." The burden of proof rests with the party opposing third party attendance to show why the court should deny the examinee's right to have counsel, a physician or other representative present. Bartell v. McCarrick, 498 So.2d 1378 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). The record in this case reveals that Allstate did not even object to Stakley's request.
Absent any valid reason to prohibit the presence of a third party, their presence should be allowed. In Gibson v. Gibson, 456 So.2d 1320, 1321 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) the court stated:
It is important to note, also, that it is the privacy of the petitioner that is involved, not that of the examiner, and if the petitioner wants to be certain that this compelled, although admittedly reasonable, intrusion into her privacy be accurately preserved, then she should be so entitled.
Accordingly, we grant the petition and quash the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
US Sec. Ins. Co. v. Cimino
...essential requirements of the law by prohibiting plaintiff's counsel from attending a rule 1.360 examination); Stakley v. Allstate Insurance Co., 547 So.2d 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)(holding absent a valid reason for denial, a person being examined pursuant to rule 1.360 can have a third party ......
-
Wilkins v. Palumbo, 93-00116
...Collins v. Skinner, 576 So.2d 1377 (Fla.2d DCA 1991); Truesdale v. Landau, 573 So.2d 429 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991); Stakley v. Allstate Insurance Co., 547 So.2d 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Gibson v. Gibson, 456 So.2d 1320 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). A court reporter is trained to be unobtrusive. A professio......
-
Broyles v. Reilly, 97-00417
...Skinner, 576 So.2d 1377, 1378 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). See also Wilkins v. Palumbo, 617 So.2d 850 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Stakley v. Allstate Ins. Co., 547 So.2d 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). This court has previously held that, in the absence of a valid reason to prohibit the presence of a third party, a......
-
Toucet v. Big Bend Moving & Storage, Inc., 91-177
...of a third party should be denied, however, lies with the party opposing the third party's attendance. Stakley v. Allstate Insurance Co., 547 So.2d 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Bartell v. McCarrick, 498 So.2d 1378 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). Absent a valid reason for denial, the examinee's request shou......
-
Mental-Health Issues in Florida Family Law.
...FAM. L. R. P. 12.369(3) (2020). (70) McCorkle v. Fast, 599 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). (71) See, e.g., Stakley v. Allstate Ins. Co., 547 So. 2d 275 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (reversing a court order prohibiting the attendance of a court reporter at a physical examination when neither party obje......