Petri Positive Pest Control, Inc. v. CCM Condominium Association, Inc. d/b/a Country Club Manor Condominium Association

 Annotate this Case
Download PDF
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT PETRI POSITIVE PEST CONTROL, INC., a Florida Corporation, Petitioner, v. CCM CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., a Florida Non-Profit Corporation d/b/a Country Club Manor Condominium Association, Respondent. No. 4D14-4728 [September 24, 2015] Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Marina Garcia-Wood, Judge; L.T. Case No. 13-027168-18 CACE. Daniel M. Schwarz, Scott A. Cole and Gregory J. Willis of Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., Miami, for petitioner. Eric C. Edison and Thomas P. Angelo of Angelo & Banta, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for respondent. PER CURIAM. Petitioner, Petri Positive Pest Control, Inc. (Petri), seeks certiorari relief from a November 12, 2014 order granting respondent CCM Condominium Association, Inc.’s (CCM) motion for leave to assert a punitive damages claim. See § 768.72, Fla. Stat. (2014). Certiorari review is available to determine whether a trial court has complied with the procedural requirements of section 768.72, but not the sufficiency of the evidence. See Globe Newspaper Co. v. King, 658 So. 2d 518, 520 (Fla. 1995). Although the trial court held a hearing on the matter, neither the court’s verbal comments nor written order indicate whether it found that CCM demonstrated a reasonable basis for seeking punitive damages. “[W]e read section 768.72 as creating a positive legal right in a party not to be subjected to financial worth discovery until the trial court has first made an affirmative finding that there is a reasonable evidentiary basis for the punitive damages claim to go to the jury.” Henn v. Sandler, 589 So. 2d 1334, 1335 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (emphasis added). We quash the order on review and remand for the trial court to enter its affirmative findings or, if necessary, hold further proceedings consistent with this opinion. STEVENSON, GROSS and FORST, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.