From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Dickinson v. Wells

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Aug 23, 1984
454 So. 2d 758 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

Opinion

No. AZ-457.

August 23, 1984.

S. Gordon Blalock of Blalock, Holbrook Akel, Jacksonville, for petitioners.

Clyde N. Wells, Jr., Jacksonville, for respondent.


Wells filed suit against Walter D. Dickinson, Inc. and Walter D. Dickinson, individually, seeking to have the defendants adjudged constructive trustees of certain property and seeking to have the defendants convey title to the property to him. Wells alleged the defendants breached their fiduciary relationship as real estate brokers to their client, Wells. The defendants say Wells never engaged their services and that no confidential or fiduciary relationship was ever established.

During the course of pretrial discovery, Wells propounded interrogatories to the defendants which, in essence, asked the defendants what, in their opinion, one would have to do to secure the services and become a client of the defendants. The defendants objected to the interrogatories.

After a hearing, the trial judge issued an order overruling the objections and giving defendants 20 days to answer the interrogatories. The defendants invoke the certiorari jurisdiction of this court seeking to have the order quashed.

Orders relating to the scope of discovery are within the wide discretion of the trial court and should not be overturned absent departure from the essential requirements of law. Burroughs Corp. v. White Lumber Sales, Inc., 372 So.2d 122 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979).

The interrogatories in question do not seek the mental impressions, conclusions, opinions or legal theories of petitioners' counsel, but only the opinions of petitioners. The interrogatories therefore do not violate Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(2). As stated in Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.340(b), "An interrogatory otherwise proper is not objectionable merely because an answer to the interrogatory involves an opinion or contention that relates to fact or calls for a conclusion or asks for information not within the personal knowledge of the party."

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.

BOOTH and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Dickinson v. Wells

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Aug 23, 1984
454 So. 2d 758 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)
Case details for

Dickinson v. Wells

Case Details

Full title:WALTER D. DICKINSON, INDIVIDUALLY, AND WALTER DICKINSON, INC., A FLORIDA…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Aug 23, 1984

Citations

454 So. 2d 758 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

Citing Cases

Suburban Propane v. Est. of Pitcher

Although the E/C accepted the claim as compensable shortly after its filing, the matters ordered discovered —…

Florida Sheriffs' Self-Insurance Fund v. Escambia County

We note that orders relating to the scope of discovery are within the "wide discretion" of the trial court…