COVID-19 WORKGROUP RELEASES VIDEO ABOUT THE STEPS BEING TAKEN TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC AT COURTHOUSES

/0 Comments/in /by

The Supreme Court’s Workgroup on the Continuity of Court Operations and Proceedings During and After COVID-19 has released its first video to help educate the public about the steps courts, clerks, and other stakeholders are taking to promote the health and safety of people visiting courthouses as the justice system returns to more complete operations.

The video, a minute-long public service announcement, emphasizes social distancing measures being implemented in courthouses across the state, the extra care being taken to continuously clean and disinfect courthouses, and the need to wear masks when doing business at the courthouses.

The video is being distributed to the 20 judicial circuits’ public information officers and clerks offices around the state to be posted on circuit websites and used on social media platforms. The video is a part of a broader communications campaign including social media messaging and graphics. The video also refers those who watch it to a newly created Steps2safeCourt.org webpage with further resources and links to local information where additional information about what to expect when visiting a courthouse may be found.

The video was produced by a collaborative group of staff from the trial courts, the Office of the State Courts Administrator, The Florida Court Clerks & Comptrollers, and The Florida Bar.

“As with the workgroup itself, the different voices of our partners in the clerks’ offices and at the Bar improve this communications strategy and make it more likely to succeed,” said Judge Lisa T. Munyon, an Orlando circuit judge and chair of the COVID-19 Workgroup. “The public, and all our stakeholders, need to know what we’re doing to address health concerns as we expand operations. It’s critical the message get across, particularly as we prepare to return to jury trials. I think this goes a long way to help.”

Munyon said the network of communicators in the Florida Courts Public Information Officers are a real strength of the state courts.

“We speak with one voice in the judicial branch and with this collaboration we’re making that voice resonate even more,” Munyon said.

The communications subgroup is also establishing guidelines/best practices for the information to be provided to prospective jurors in summonses, on court and clerk websites, via public information campaigns by the courts, clerks, and the Bar on courthouse signage, and in court/clerk telephone recordings regarding the precautionary measures being taken to protect public health and safety.

Polk County Clerk and Comptroller Stacy M. Butterfield, CPA, a member of the COVID-19 Workgroup and president of the Florida Court Clerks & Comptrollers, said the clerks work closely with courts on so much, that this joint communications plan makes sense.

“We can amplify our message of preparation and access when we speak together with our partners,” Butterfield said. “Clarity and transparency are going to be essential as we begin the process of calling Floridians to jury service. We think this campaign with the Bar and the courts is a key part of getting our message out effectively.”

While jury trials remain suspended, pilot projects to test innovations in five circuits are set to begin soon. Chief judges may begin jury trials as soon as 30 days after judicial circuits successfully transition to phase 2 of reopening, as described in the most recent updates to orders from Chief Justice Charles Canady about expanded access.

A second animated video focused on instructions for those called to jury service is set to be released in early July. By then, a second round of social media messages and graphics about jury service will be delivered as well.

Spanish- and Creole-language versions of the videos are also being made with the help of staff in the 11th Judicial Circuit.

“We are stronger with one voice,” Butterfield said.

Falling Gate Case Resolved

/0 Comments/in /by

Jeffrey R. Davis, P.A. is proud to announce the law firm has successfully resolved a lawsuit involving a falling gate that injured a young child. The five-year-old boy was playing in the yard of the house his parents rented when he slid a heavy metal gate open causing it to fall off its track. The boy tried to run as the gate fell but unfortunately it happened too quicklyand pinned him against the concrete driveway. He sustained a fracture that resulted in a two-week hospital stay. Fortunately, after several months of immobility, the boy was able to make a full and complete recovery.

In this case, the age of the child was a significant factor in assessing responsibility for the incident. In Florida, a child under six years of age cannot be held responsible for negligence. This means that no assessment of fault can be made against the child individually; however, his parents can be held responsible for failing to supervise. This law dates back to the Supreme Court case of Swindel v. Hellkamp, 242 So. 2d. 708 (Fla. 1970). That case involved a four-year-old child running into the street and getting hit by a car. The Florida Supreme Court stated; “In the absence of a legislative declaration, it is our opinion and we so hold, that the child herein involved and any other child under six years of age is conclusory presumed to be incapable of committing contributory negligence. This holding is compatible with the common-law rule that a child under seven is conclusory presumed to be incapable of committing a crime, inasmuch as a child must learn individual safety at an early age but social consciousness comes at a somewhat later age”.

The homeowner had no insurance. Apparently, the gate had been installed years before by a previous tenant and no permit was obtained. The owner of the property was advised by the tenant that lived in the house before the young boy’s family that the gate was not properly attachedand would fall when completely opened. Not only did the landlord not get the gate fixedbut they never warned the young boy’s parents about this problem.

During the lawsuit, the landlord blamed the young boy’s family for the accident and claimed that the child’s father was the one that installed the gate. Our lawyers were able to show through prior Google Street photographs, that the gate had been in existence for years.Our legal team also tracked down the previous tenant who had complained to the landlord about the gate not being safe. The case settled at mediation, right before trial for a confidential sum that will pay for all of the medical bills and provide for the child’s financial security once he is an adult.

At Jeffrey R. Davis, P.A., we represent victims of injuries caused by dangerous conditions on property. These cases, known as premises liability cases, often involve issues of construction, engineering, architectural design and property management. It is often necessary to work with experts in multiple fields in order to properly prepare premises liability cases for trial. If you have been injured because of a dangerous condition on a property, please call Jeffrey R. Davis, P.A. at (305) 577-3777. We are available on a 24/7 basis and are bilingual. All consultations are free of charge.

COVID-19 Insurance Developments

/0 Comments/in /by

Property/Business Interruption Insurance

Litigation in the U.S involving business interruption losses (principally involving whether such losses have arisen in connection with physical loss to property, and whether various exclusions for virus and pandemic apply) is proliferating. Some of the recently-filed cases are noted below.

Five cases v. Travelers and CA Governor (CA) – Mark Geragos, his Los Angeles law firm and several other businesses have sued Travelers claiming the insurer is wrongly refusing to cover claims. The five suits accuse Travelers of failing to honor property insurance policies without a virus exclusion, and which should have been triggered when Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti issued an order closing nonessential businesses on March 15. The suits plead that the “currently raging pandemic” has caused real physical loss and damage around the world and that the CA Governor’s “stay-at-home” order has prohibited access to the properties. The plaintiffs do not expressly seek a ruling that the COVID-19 virus existed at any of the subject properties. It is unclear why the Governor was named as a defendant; it is possible he was named as friendly defendant to give him standing to make statements about why he issued the executive order and that he was concerned about property damage when he did so.

LH Dining LLC v. Admiral Ind. Co. (PA federal court) – A Philadelphia restaurateur alleges that orders closing “nonessential” businesses and dine-in services to prevent the spread of the novel coronavirus triggered “civil authority” coverage of lost income under its commercia

Legal battles loom as businesses hit by virus sue insurers

/0 Comments/in /by

Pandemic outbreaks are uninsured because they are uninsurable,’ contends insurance industry.

A once-bustling bar and grill tucked below a Michigan Avenue overpass famously inspired a “Saturday Night Live” skit starring John Belushi and Bill Murray. But the money the Billy Goat Tavern is losing during the coronavirus outbreak is no joke.

The tavern and millions of other shuttered businesses nationwide have turned to their insurers to help recoup their losses following state-mandate closures, which combined may exceed $300 billion a month. But insurers have widely rejected the claims, so the Billy Goat joined a growing line of businesses, including barbershops and casinos, suing insurers to force them to pay.

“These businesses are in the most trying times in their history and are going to their insurance company to get what they paid for,” said Chris Esbrook, a lawyer for the landmark tavern, which opened in 1934 and, as legend goes, cursed the Chicago Cubs.

Insurers say policies for natural or man-made disasters don’t cover virus outbreaks that bring economies to a standstill, and high-stakes battles in courtrooms coast to coast are sure to follow. What’s at stake could be the survival of thousands of businesses if insurers don’t pay and the insolvency of big-name insurance companies if they do.

“Pandemic outbreaks are uninsured because they are uninsurable,” David A. Sampson, president of the American Property Casualty Insurance Association, said this month.

No revenue is flowing into the Billy Goat, which previously drew hundreds of tourists a day, including some who remember the best-known line from a series of late 1970s SNL skits in which restaurant staff rebuffs patrons ordering anything but the house specialties: “Cheezborger, cheezborger, cheezborger! No Coke … Pepsi!”

As many as 30 million small businesses straining to survive with little to no revenue could submit virus-related claims worth up to $430 billion, the insurance association estimated. Those unprecedented numbers would be multiple times higher than claims following the Sept. 11 attacks.

The expectation is that insurers will continue to reject the vast majority of claims, triggering waves of lawsuits from businesses in nearly every town and city. Such a filing frenzy could add to logjams in courts when they reopen fully after the pandemic eases.

Among dozens of lawsuits filed to date is one by the Choctaw Nation casinos in Oklahoma and another by the Los Angeles law firm of celebrity attorney Mark Geragos.

“You pay insurance for decades for precisely the unthinkable, and when it happens these insurance companies do the unconscionable” by rejecting claims, Geragos told The Hollywood Reporter.

Forcing insurers to pay hundreds of billions of dollars a month could quickly deplete the $800 billion set aside to cover future home, auto and other losses, according to the insurance association.

The attorney for the Billy Goat, which expanded from its flagship site to include establishments around Chicago, says he has little sympathy for insurers.

“They are in the business of selling people insurance for exactly this kind of situation,” Esbrook said. “They can’t now cry they’re poor when the very situation they are insuring arises.”

President Donald Trump recently expressed sympathy for businesses asking insurers to pay up for business interruption coverage.

“When they finally need it, the insurance company says, ‘We’re not going to give it,’” he said at a coronavirus task force news conference. “We can’t let that happen.”

Similar conflicts are playing out in Europe and Asia, though they aren’t likely to see the torrent of lawsuits sure to come in the litigious United States.

The question on which many cases will hinge is whether the presence of the virus in or near a business can be categorized as direct physical damage, something that would otherwise be clearly covered. It’s a question courts haven’t definitively answered.

Proving a microscopic virus was ever even on a business’s premises, never mind damaged it, could pose a challenge to plaintiff attorneys.

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court last week may have inadvertently helped business owners make their case when it upheld a state order closing nonessential businesses during the pandemic, likening the coronavirus to hurricanes in its ruling.

“COVID-19 pandemic is, by all definitions, a natural disaster and a catastrophe of massive proportions,” the majority opinion said.

Insurance companies say most policies that cover unanticipated interruptions to a business’s operations specifically exclude pandemics. Such exclusions became more common after a SARS virus outbreak in the early 2000s devastated businesses in parts of Asia.

A message seeking comment from the insurer the Billy Goat is suing, Society Insurance, wasn’t returned.

A note to policyholders on the website of Travelers Indemnity, the insurer Geragos is suing, reads like a blanket denial of virus shutdown claims because they’re “not a result of direct physical loss or damage.” It also cites virus exclusions in its policies.

But such exclusions don’t mean businesses don’t have valid claims, the business lawyers contend. They point to separate policy provisions requiring that insurers pay losses when civil authorities intervene during emergencies and order businesses to close.

The Billy Goat Tavern’s legal team says their case may be that much stronger because their insurer did not write in a virus exclusion and then still denied coverage.

Pressure on insurers isn’t only coming in the form of lawsuits.

State lawmakers, including in Illinois, New York and New Jersey, have proposed laws that would dictate insurers accept business claims for coronavirus damage, in some cases even if policies exclude pandemics.

Industry advocates say such mandates could drain insurance funds needed to pay claims during upcoming hurricane season and when other natural disaster inevitably strike. The laws, they argue, also would undermine the contract law upon which free markets rely.

“If elected officials require payment for perils that were excluded, never underwritten for, and for which no premium was ever collected, catastrophic results will occur,” said Charles Chamness, president of the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies.

___

Reprinted with permission from The Associated Press.

Florida Nursing Homes Request Immunity from Coronavirus Lawsuits

/0 Comments/in /by

Florida’s largest advocacy group for long-term care providers is requesting protection from lawsuits for health care professionals amid the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak. The Florida Health Care Association (FHCA) sent a letter to Gov. Ron DeSantis requesting “immunity from any liability, civil or criminal” under certain conditions for nursing homes, hospitals, and other facilities. The group is the most recent in a series of health care associations seeking legal immunity during the coronavirus.

Florida has reported 962 cases of COVID-19 throughout the state’s 93 long-term care facilities. A recent USA Today Analysis of federal inspection data found that a majority of nursing homes (75%) in the U.S. have been cited for failing to properly monitor and control infections in the past three years. Nursing homes provide the ‘perfect-storm’ environment for COVID-19, putting residents at higher risk of serious illness with facilities that are not properly equipped to prevent disease and the spread of infection.

Georgia recently issued an executive order that provides civil immunity for health care institutions, medical facilities, and “auxiliary emergency management workers” defined as staff, contractors, and employees. This ‘legal immunity’ and protection from lawsuits protect the powerful and prevents patients and their families from obtaining justice, at a time when they need it most.

Members of the Florida Health Care Association (FHCA) are requesting the same blanket immunity from lawsuits. The association sent a formal letter to the Governor requesting both civil and criminal liability that may result from caring for individuals with COVID-19. They are requesting immunity not only for nursing home workers but all healthcare facilities including nursing homes, hospitals, or assisted living centers, covering employees, volunteers, contractors, and home healthcare workers.

Nursing homes throughout the country are struggling to prevent the spread of COVID-19, many keeping their residents quarantined in their individual rooms. However, not all elderly patients are able to function independently in a closed setting.

For example, a patient suffering from dementia may not be able to keep his or her mask on and can easily fall if left alone. With dementia patients, it can be difficult to tell if they are infected, common symptoms include increased agitation. The constant care and supervision that many of these patients require put them at an even greater risk of contracting the virus from caretakers and staff.

Staff members who are asymptomatic can easily spread the virus to older individuals. Florida does not require nursing home facilities to tell families and residents when an employee or resident has gotten the virus or has died from it.

Concerns have been raised, regarding the healthcare industry’s requested immunity from these lawsuits. Florida recently lessened the requirements for new hires in these facilities. Staffing shortages have caused the state to waive fingerprinting requirements for background checks to get employees hired and working quickly.

The healthcare industry is not the only industry seeking immunity from lawsuits during this time, some of the major cruise lines and their legal teams have been working hard to have the courts allow them to not respond to filings against them.

Frivolous lawsuits, opening up outdoor spaces at issue for Re-Open Florida task force

/0 Comments/in /by

Businesses fear opening up their storefronts and getting sued from customers who contract COVID-19.

For the second meeting of the state’s industries hit the hardest by a Florida economy reeling from COVID-19 lockdowns, talks shifted more to the outdoors, but businesses still want swift and clear action.

Dana Young, CEO of VISIT FLORIDA again led the panel, which on Wednesday focused on outdoor recreation, professional sports, theme parks and retail. The prior meeting, the day before, mainly focused on lodging and accommodations.

One shared concern raised by business interests is the fear customers could contract COVID-19 at their business and slap them with a lawsuit.

St. Petersburg Republican Sen. Jeff Brandes is writing up legislation for a possible Special Session or the 2021 Session to protect businesses against those lawsuits.

“Asymptomatic people working in their faculty could spread the disease and lawsuits could come from that,” he told Florida Politics.

AJ de Moya, with The de Moya Group, said businesses have never faced lawsuits for the flu or other diseases.

“I’ve got some friends of mine that run DOW 30 companies in Florida, and they are concerned that opening up their offices will put them at traumatic risk, and I think it’s really important and we protect this,” he said.

Jacksonville Mayor Lenny Curry spoke about his city’s decision to reopen beaches last weekend and to enforce the rules with megaphones and on carts, a minimalist method he said was working. Opening up a larger space could help give Floridians freedom to exercise and enjoy nature.

“I believe when you open your beaches or your parks, which we’ve also done, a dictator-style we’re going to come arrest you I don’t believe is the way forward,” he said.

Curry added that photographs taken over the weekend inaccurately portrayed a rush and crowding of people at Jacksonville Beach.

Beaches are open from 6 a.m. to 11 a.m. and 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. for recreation like swimming or taking walks. Sun bathing, laying out blankets and towels, chairs and grills are not allowed on the city’s beaches and groups must follow social distancing practices.

And Department of Environmental Protection Secretary Noah Valenstein said the department was weighing the usual crowding at state parks before easing restrictions there.

John Sprouls, CEO of Universal Orlando Resort and executive vice president of Universal Parks & Resorts, said the parks planned to utilize space, health screenings and sanitation efforts to keep guests and employees safe.

“We have a greater ability to practice and enforce social distancing while still allowing guests to experience our parks,” Sprouls said, adding that resorts essentially have the same public services as cities, like medical services.

Universal Resorts plans to expand an existing virtual queuing app used at Volcano Bay and utilizing parks’ full acreage to promote social distancing. The queuing app piqued the interest of one airline industry representative on the call, who said airports could use such a service for security lines and boarding airplanes.

Originally, the PGA Tour planned to keep golfing going and open to the public with social distancing measures. But as federal and state officials began handing down advisories against massed gatherings, the final nail in the coffin for the PGA Tour was learning that Disney and Universal resorts, with swathes of open land similar to a golf course, were closing.

Len Brown, the PGA Tour’s executive vice president and chief legal officer, noted that its tournaments often benefit various charities that have also missed out the tour’s revenue. Golfing would begin June 8 under the tour’s current timeline.

The National Basketball Association and National Hockey League hope to resume the regular season over the summer, said Matthew Caldwell, president and CEO of the Florida Panthers. After a period of team training, the NHL hopes to resume the season in July.

Like during Tuesday’s meeting, Walter Carpenter with the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) emphasized the need or small business employees to return to work. On top of reopening businesses, he emphasized the need for customers, products, services and loans from the federal Paycheck Protection Program (PPP).

“I think, as we move forward, it’s important not to overly regulate, not to be overly restricted,” he said.

With PPP loans only reaching 27% of Florida’s small businesses that have applied for funding, increasing funding and revenue is a necessity to keep businesses alive. According to an NFIB study, 15% of small businesses could not last more than a month without more funding and 35% could last one to two months.

Unlike other businesses and groups represented in the group of hardest-hit industries, Walmart is an essential business. On Tuesday, DeSantis pushed back against the essential versus nonessential services framing public health officials use, instead elevating the importance of risk levels.

“The more and more I go through it, I think think that that’s an illusory distinction,” he said. “Quite frankly, I don’t think it’s terribly helpful even when you’re talking about a pandemic.”

Walmart is asking employees and customers to wear face masks, using Plexiglas barriers and using floor decals to reinforce proper social distancing measures. It has also boosted the number of employees to help restocking and sanitization.

“The creation of industry standards that can be communicated across the state to inform our employees and our customers will be very helpful,” said Monesia Brown, Walmart’s director of public affairs and government relations.

And with employees who have been shut out from work or are afraid to go back, businesses raised mental health and framing the reopening as a good thing as important for employees’ mental health. Dr. Lillian Rivera, a former health officer at the Miami-Dade County Department of Health, said county health departments can help connect businesses to resources and services to get employees the help they need.

A coronavirus side effect: Lots of lawsuits

/0 Comments/in /by

Carnival Corp. is facing lawsuits from several passengers who claim they weren’t warned of the high risk of being infected with the novel coronavirus on the company’s cruise ships.

Wells Fargo, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase and US Bancorp have been sued by small businesses that missed out on coronavirus rescue loans because, the small firms contend, the banks first processed big loans that generated big fees rather than on a first-come-first-served basis.

Six Flags Magic Mountain is being sued by a theme park fan who objects to the park collecting monthly payments for his membership pass while the park is closed due to the pandemic.

Crisis and calamities spark finger pointing and demands for compensation, and the coronavirus outbreak is no different. Like the pandemic, coronavirus-related legal disputes are likely to be widespread and drag on for years.

“You are going to see more lawsuits,” said Brian Kabateck, an attorney and chairman of the board at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles. “They are going to keep coming. Things that you and I can’t even imagine, they are going to be coming.”

A litigation surge followed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, including lawsuits by victims and families alleging that aviation companies and the owners of the World Trade Center failed to anticipate the possibility that terrorists could hijack planes and crash them into buildings.

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina in 2005, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers was sued for its alleged failure to protect New Orleans from the storm’s floodwaters.

Los Angeles police and fire departments, along with insurance companies, were sued after the widespread unrest of 1992, accusing them of failing to protect victims or refusing to pay out insurance claims.

Floods, terrorist strikes, riots and illness generate waves of lawsuits because victims often try to find someone to blame for their misfortunes while opportunistic attorneys will look to capitalize on the crisis, Kabateck said. In addition, companies that put profits ahead of the safety of their customers during a crisis are sure to face lawsuits, he added.

“Here you have a crisis that is not only the likes of which we’ve never seen before, but it affects so many people,” Kabateck said.

Related video: Companies should be protected from coronavirus liability lawsuits, Larry Kudlow says (provided by CNBC)

The latest litigation surge includes lawsuits by federal, state and local agencies, accusing companies of price gouging on items such as face masks, paper towels and hand sanitizers and selling fake coronovirus cures.

The U.S. Department of Justice shut down a website in March that offered a vaccine kit to fight off the virus for $4.95. The state of Alaska sued a man for buying thousands of N95 masks and selling them at a huge markup. The lawsuit seeks to collect $25,000 in penalties and to force the man to repay the markup price to his customers.

Although the outbreak forced the closure of most civil courts in California since March, that has not stopped attorneys from filing the suits. Getting the cases before a jury is likely to take even longer than usual.

Carnival Corp., the parent company of Carnival Cruises, Princess Cruises, Costa Cruises and others, has been named in several lawsuits, stemming from coronavirus outbreaks on ships that set sail after the virus had begun to spread around the world.

James and Kelea Nevis of Arizona filed a suit against Costa Cruise Lines on April 14 in Florida, claiming they both contracted the coronavirus on a 30-day cruise to the Caribbean on the Costa Luminsoa, which set sail from Florida on Feb. 24.

They claim in the lawsuit that Costa Cruises should have canceled their trip considering the virus had already spread on a previous voyage of the Diamond Princess ship and the CDC issued a statement on Feb. 18, highlighting the risk of infections on a ship.

“If you’re going to still set sail then have precautions in place,” said Jeremiah Lowe, an attorney representing the Nevis.

The lawsuit, which seeks more than $1 million in damages, alleges that the crew of the Luminosa didn’t ask passengers to isolate themselves in their staterooms until March 15, after several passengers already fell ill and were taken off the ship for treatment.

Roger Frizzell, a spokesman for Carnival, said he could not comment on ongoing litigation but added: “Looking back, there are always opportunities for improvement, but we operated our cruise ships based on the direction of government and health authorities, using the best information that was available at the time.”

Suing a cruise line is more complicated than suing most U.S.-based company because some violations that occur on international waters are governed by maritime law and cruise lines also impose a “Carriage of Contract” provision with the sale of each cruise, limiting where and how a passenger can sue, according to legal experts.

“Anyone suing the cruise lines will need to overcome a number of legal and practical hurdles, including where to file, whether they can even proceed through a class action, and whether they can prove that the cruise line had enough warnings about the coronavirus such that they should have done more to prevent the transmittal of the disease,” said Brad Brian, a Los Angeles attorney who represented Transocean, the operator of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig that exploded in 2010 in the Gulf of Mexico.

Southwest Airlines, among other air carriers, has been sued by at least one traveler who says he was not given a refund when his flight was canceled but was only offered credits toward a future flight.

Adrian Bombin filed a lawsuit April 13 in Pennsylvania, alleging that after a flight he booked from Baltimore to Havana was canceled, Southwest denied his request for a refund, offering only a credit for a future flight. He seeks a refund, attorneys fees and any other “relief the court deems reasonable the just.”

A similar lawsuit was filed in Chicago by a Minnesota resident against United Airlines. A Maryland man sued Delta Air Lines Friday on similar grounds in Atlanta.

The U.S. Department of Transportation issued a warning April 3 to all airlines, noting that “The obligation of airlines to provide refunds, including the ticket price and any optional fee charged for services a passenger is unable to use, does not cease when the flight disruptions are outside of the carrier’s control.”

In email statements, both Southwest and United said refunds are one of the options passengers have if a flight is canceled.

Despite such statements, Hassan Zavareei, an attorney representing Bombin, said his client was refused a refund. Zavareei said he plans to sue other airlines for doing the same.

“Because they are in a difficult situation they cannot simply turn around and violate their contract with their costumers,” he said of airlines.

Frankie Ruiz of Los Angeles filed a suit this month against Six Flags Magic Mountain in Valencia and its parent company, saying the theme park is deducting $9.95 from his credit card each month for a membership to enter the park even though the park closed March 13 due to the outbreak.

Disney had a similar policy for its annual pass holders after closing its parks in Anaheim and Orlando in mid-March. Disney later reversed its policy, announcing that pass holder could stop making monthly payments without penalty.

The Six Flags claim seeks to be classified as a class-action suit to include all other members who are being charged a monthly payment. It requests unspecified damages.

The lawsuit says Magic Mountain advertised that the park would be “accessible every day of the year, and that their customers would have access to their parks upon paying a membership fee.” In the lawsuit, Ruiz calls that advertising “ false and misleading.”

In a statement, Six Flags said members who keep making payments will get free upgrades once the parks open and will have their passes extended to make up for the time the parks were closed.

The Six Flags Magic Mountain website page that explains that the park closed because of the outbreak does not mention the option to stop making monthly payments. A Six Flags representative said there is an”easily and readily available” online membership service page that gives people the option to pause or cancel a membership.

The company also mentioned the option of pausing payments on its Facebook page.

©2020 Los Angeles Times

Florida businesses fear lawsuits when allowed to reopen

/0 Comments/in /by

(The Center Square) – Nonessential Florida businesses want assurances from the state Legislature that if they reopen in accordance with state and federal guidelines, they will not be sued if patrons and workers contract COVID-19.

“I’ve got friends that run Dow 30 companies in Florida and they are concerned that opening up their offices will put them at traumatic risk,” said AJ de Moya, vice president and general manager with The de Moya Group, a Miami-based road builder. “I think it’s really important and we protect this.”

De Moya’s comments came during Wednesday’s teleconference meeting of the Re-Open Florida Task Force’s 35-member Working Group on Tourism, Construction, Real Estate, Recreation, Retail and Transportation.

The potential that some businesses may not reopen out of a fear of lawsuits is something lawmakers already had planned to address in a special session, Sen. Jeff Brandes, R-St. Petersburg, told Florida Politics.

“Asymptomatic people working in their facility could spread the disease and lawsuits could come from that,” Brandes said, noting he will sponsor a bill to hold businesses that comply with regulations harmless.

After canvassing ideas on reopening restaurants and hotels Tuesday, the second-day session Wednesday focused on theme parks and sports.

The group, one of several subpanels representing specific industries, will forward recommendations to the task force’s 22-member executive committee, which is commissioned to deliver a reopening plan to Gov. Ron DeSantis by week’s end.

Universal Orlando Resort CEO John Sprouls told the panel Universal Orlando Resort is studying how to reopen its gates, closed since March, but is hesitant to do so until it can screen workers and guests before entering.

“We’re not sure yet how we’re going to do that, but we’re looking for help from health officials to help us figure out what might be an appropriate protocol to try to minimize the possibility of any sick guests entering the parks,” he said. “We’re evaluating face coverings for our team members. We’re potentially evaluating, allowing or even encouraging guests to wear face coverings as well. At least initially.”

Universal and Disney World are among theme parks that draw 85 million people to Orlando and the Tampa-area annually, according to a 2018 report by the Themed Entertainment Association and AECOM. Many patronize the parks’ affiliated hotels, fine dining and fast-food restaurants, nightclubs and on-site retailers.

Among “different scenarios” being pondered by Universal Orlando Resort are limiting crowds, “virtual” or expanded FastPass-style lines, staggered ride seating and online food ordering, Sprouls said.

“We would be capping attendance to make sure we could create a maximum amount of social distancing,” he said. “And then, as we gained confidence in those practices and procedures that we’re employing, and as we learned from what we’re doing, we would gradually see that attendance rise.”

Those practices and procedures await state and federal guideline clarity, but Sprouls said enhanced cleaning, checking and logging workers’ daily temperatures, and onsite medical professionals to observe – and be observed by visitors – are likely components.

“If (visitors) don’t feel safe,” he said, “they won’t attend.”

Florida Panthers President and CEO Matthew Caldwell endorsed Universal’s “virtual” lines and online food ordering concepts, but said they may not be viable in arenas and stadiums.

“We’re looking at everything. We’re looking at doing cashless arenas next year,” he said. “There’s only a few sports platforms that do that right now, but we’re really digging in hard to just limit touchpoints as much as possible.”

Caldwell said the NHL and NBA still hope to finish their suspended seasons, perhaps playing at neutral sites with few or no fans in the stands.

Jeff Brandes prepares legislation to protect businesses from coronavirus lawsuits

/0 Comments/in /by

The legislation would not protect gross negligence.

Sen. Jeff Brandes is preparing legislation that would protect Florida businesses from being sued if someone contracts the novel coronavirus while working or receiving goods and services on their premises.

As Gov. Ron DeSantis takes steps to begin reopening the state as soon as May 1, Brandes said businesses, particularly small businesses, are worried about liability issues.

“It really is one of the top concerns of businesses reopening,” Brandes said. “Asymptomatic people working in their faculty could spread the disease and lawsuits could come from that.”

“This is a top of mind issue for them and one that will keep Florida from reaching its full potential,” he continued.

Brandes said he’s heard from numerous small business owners who are fearful over liability associated with reopening if an employee or customer were to contract the illness even if they were taking reasonable steps to protect them. He worries that fear will lead to businesses not reopening even if the state allows them to do so.

The legislation would block lawsuits against companies over COVID-19 contraction as long as those companies were taking all necessary precautions to protect employees and customers.

Bad actors who ignore required precautions, whether that’s social distancing or personal protective equipment or some other requirements related to reopening, would not be protected under Brandes’ legislation.

“If there is gross negligence, that’s a very different standard,” Brandes said.

“We think there should be a safe harbor for businesses who are trying to do the right thing. It’s all about getting people back to work.”

Brandes said he would file the legislation at a Special Session if one is convened, which he estimated only had about a 30% chance of happening.

If there isn’t a Special Session to deal with coronavirus-related issues, Brandes said he’d file the legislation during regular session.

The legislation, Brandes said, is in its very early stages.

He’s also working with federal partners to push national legislation.

COVID-19 AND MEDICAL MALPRACTICE

/0 Comments/in /by

Last week Governor Andrew Cuomo of New York issued an executive order which granted immunity from lawsuits to medical healthcare providers for injury or death. The March 23, 2020 order provided, among many things: “to the extent necessary to provide that all physicians, physician assistants, specialists assistant, nurse practitioners, licensed registered professional nurses and licensedpractical nurses shall be immune from civil liability for any injury or death alleged to have been sustained directly as a result or an act or omission by such medical professional in the course of providing medical services in support of the state’s response to the COVID-19 outbreak, unless it is established that such injury or death was caused by the gross negligence of such medical professional”.

Certainly, these are unprecedented times that call for unprecedented measures. Florida already has strictregulations that provide for such immunity and protections to healthcare providers and no new laws, executive orders or amendments are required to protect healthcare providers rendering services for COVID-19 related care.

First, Florida has a Good Samarian Act which provides immunity from civil liability (F.S. 768.13) This law states that, “ Any person, including those licensed to practice medicine, who gratuitously and in good faith renders emergency care or treatment either in direct response to emergency situations related to and arising out of a public health emergency or at the scene of an emergency outside of a hospital, doctor’s office, or other place having proper medical equipment, without objection of the injured victim or victims thereof, shall not be held liable for any civil damages as a result of such care or treatment or as a result of any act or failure to act in providing or arranging further medical treatment where the person acts as an ordinary reasonably prudent person would have acted under the same or similar circumstances”.

Under that same law, “any health care provider, including a hospital providing emergency services shall not be held liable for any civil damages as a result of such medical care or treatment unless such damages result from providing, or failing to provide, medical care or treatment under circumstances demonstrating a reckless disregard for the consequences so as to affect the life or health of another”. Florida’s Good Samaritan Act is designed to protect Florida’s healthcare providers from any civil liability (meaning the risk of lawsuits) for emergency care. No such additional rules or protections are needed and, in this writer’s opinion, should not be created since there are even further protections under the Florida Medical Malpractice statute. The legislature’s intent in creating this law was crystal clear and is plainly stated in the statute; “it is to encourage healthcare practitioners to provide necessary emergency care to all persons without fear oflitigation”. The Act further expands to help a provider that undertakes medical care for FEMA or any local emergency response team.

Florida’s MedicalMalpracticestatuteprovides an additional layer of protection to healthcare providers rendering care in the era of the Coronavirus crisis. Medical Malpractice in Florida is governed by Chapter 766 of the Florida Statutes. The law that is already on the books provides specificprotection to healthcare providers based on the very definition of what a person bringing a medical malpractice lawsuit must prove.

“The claimant shall have the burden of proving by the greater weight of evidence that the alleged actions of the health care provider represented a breach of the prevailing professional standard of care for that health care provider. The prevailing professional standard of care for a given health care provider shall be that level of care, skill, and treatment which, in light of all relevant surrounding circumstances, is recognized as acceptable and appropriate by reasonably prudent similar health care providers.”

The words, “in light of all relevant surrounding circumstances” clearly allowsCOVID-19 related care to be considered an extraordinarilyunusual and emergency crisis which would not be consideredordinary medical care.

In plain and simple words, no lawyer is going to sue a healthcare provider that was trying to save someone’s life during a COVID-19 outbreak. No jury is going to side with a claimant suing a healthcare provider for trying to save the life of a person suffering the effects of the Coronavirus. It is not realistic to even contemplate such a case.

As Floridians we need to be vigilant in protecting our rights. We cannot allow a crisis or emergency to be used as apretext to create redundant, unnecessary and confusing new regulations that really don’t change what is already established state law. Many conservative legislators are trying to get the Governor to put blanket statementsof immunity in our existing healthcare laws. They are not needed. Doctors and healthcare providers are alreadyprotected. During these unparalleled and frightening times, the last thing we should do is over-react and give up our rights. Healthcare providers, first responders and all those rendering aid as good Samaritans have existinglegal protections and immunity from civil lawsuits stemming from the care they render to patients suffering the effects of COVID-19. Education, awareness and common sense are essential tools during these unparallel days.