Waite v. Wellington Boats, Inc., BA-480
| Citation | 459 So.2d 425 |
| Decision Date | 15 November 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. BA-480,BA-480 |
| Parties | William M. WAITE, Petitioner, v. WELLINGTON BOATS, INC., Respondent. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
William M. Waite, in pro. per.
C. Harris Dittmar and Timothy J. Corrigan, Jacksonville, for respondent.
William M. Waite seeks relief, via a petition for certiorari, from the trial court's protective order precluding Waite, an unrepresented defendant in the court below, from personally deposing by oral examination the plaintiff, Wellington Boats, Inc., and its principal corporate officers because of an extremely antagonistic relationship which has developed between Waite and such officers. We deny the petition.
Fla.R.Civ.Pr. 1.280 provides in relevant part:
Trial courts must be accorded broad discretion in the treatment of discovery problems through the employment of the protective provisions contemplated by Rule 1.280. See Charles Sales Corp. v. Rovenger, 88 So.2d 551 (Fla.1956); Abelson v. Bosem, 329 So.2d 330 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976). Moreover, petitioner has made no showing that he has been, or will be, unable to obtain needed discovery by other means available under the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Thus, petitioner has failed to demonstrate that the trial court abused its discretion in finding the requisite good cause to support the Rule 1.280(c) protective order. The petition must therefore be denied as the subject order does not depart from the essential requirements of the law.
Petition Denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rice-Lamar v. City of Fort Lauderdale
...City's protective order and preventing Lamar from deposing the City's Mayor and Vice-Mayor. See generally Waite v. Wellington Boats, Inc., 459 So.2d 425, 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)(a trial court's decision to grant, deny, or limit discovery is a matter of discretion which should be set aside o......
-
Rice-Lamar v. City of Fort Lauderdale
...City's protective order and preventing Lamar from deposing the City's Mayor and Vice-Mayor. See generally Waite v. Wellington Boats, Inc., 459 So. 2d 425, 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)(a trial court's decision to grant, deny, or limit discovery is a matter of discretion which should be set aside ......
-
Beekie v. Morgan
...annoyance, embarrassment, oppression or undue burden or expense. Protective orders must be based on good cause. Waite v. Wellington Boats, Inc., 459 So.2d 425 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Under the facts of this case, all that was warranted was for the court to order the payment of expenses. See Fl......
-
Fla. Highway Patrol v. Bejarano
...of discovery problems through the employment of the protective provisions contemplated by Rule 1.280.” Waite v. Wellington Boats, Inc., 459 So.2d 425, 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). See also Brown, 500 So.2d at 656 (“The regulation by the trial courts of depositions is largely a matter of the cou......
-
Deposing "apex" officials in Florida.
...(E.D. Ark., June 7, 1996). [7] The only decision in Florida involving an apex deposition was Waite v. Wellington Boats, Inc., 459 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1st D.C.A. 1984); however, Waite does not provide any guidance because the First District never addressed any of the facts in the case nor its r......