The real test, the court explained, is whether “a reasonable person could conclude, based on the claimant’s evidence, that the defendant committed ‘intentional misconduct’ or ‘gross negligence,'” as those terms are defined in section 768.72(2). The judge does not weigh evidence or decide credibility. And in a second point for claimants, the court held the judge looks only at the claimant’s evidence at this stage, not at any rebuttal the defendant offers.
Trending
- Is Your Gut Healthy? How to Tell
- Coach Promo Codes for July 2026
- Apartment owner’s lawsuit accuses Topa of underpaying Hurricane Beryl claim
- AI Is Slowly Killing Index Fund Diversification
- Trump Accounts to Boost Kids’ Financial Know-How, per Bessent
- Adductor Training May Be the Legday Solution for Strength, Mobility, and Injury Prevention
- 15 Pre-Fall Staples Fashion People Are Buying From the Nordstrom Anniversary Sale
- 4 Technical Tools to Read Stock Market Charts Like the Pros
