Ames v. Provident Life and Acc. Ins. Co.

3 Citing briefs

  1. Tomasic et al v. Travelers Insurance et al

    MOTION to dismiss for failure to state a claim as to Count III of Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint

    Filed March 1, 2017

    Under Florida law, a cause of action for civil theft “derives from two statutory sources: the criminal section setting forth the elements of theft, and the civil section granting private parties a cause of action for a violation of the criminal section.” See Palmer v. Gotta Have It Golf Collectibles, Inc., 106 F.Supp.2d 1289, 1303 (S.D. Fla. 2000) (quoting Ames v. Provident Life and Accident Ins. Co., 942 F.Supp. 551, 560 (S.D. Fla. 1994), aff’d 86 F.2d 1168 (11th Cir. 1996)). There is no general cause of action in Florida for theft, because “[i]n order to establish an action for civil theft, the claimant must prove the statutory elements of theft, as well as criminal intent.”

  2. Edmondson et al v. Caliente Resorts, Llc et al

    MOTION for summary judgment

    Filed February 10, 2017

    The requisite showing of “felonious intent” is a high threshold to meet. Ames v. Provident Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 942 F.Supp. 551, 560–61 (S.D. Fla. 1994). A person who could have legitimately believed that he or she had rights to the property at issue lacks the requisite knowing felonious intent.

  3. In Re: Checking Account Overdraft Litigation

    RESPONSE in Opposition re MOTION to Strike Compass Bank's Motion to Strike Declarations of Tod Aronovitz and Arthur Olsen; to Strike a Portion of the Declaration of Stephen T. Anderson and to Strike Political Advocacy Internet Citations and Memorandum of Law in Support

    Filed September 12, 2011

    11; also Almeida v. Amazon.com, Inc., 456 F.3d 1316, 1328 (11th Cir. 2006).10 Given Compass’s unwillingness to cooperate in discovery, it 9 Kohl Affidavit, ¶¶ 11, 13 [DE # 1822-6]; McNeal and Seigle Affidavits, ¶¶ 11, 12 [DE # 1822-7 – 1822-8]. 10 See also Ames v. Provident Life and Acc. Ins. Co., 942 F. Supp. 551, 560 (S.D. Fla. 1994); Autochina Ltd. v. Huang, 2010 WL 3009112, at *3 (S.D. Fla. 2010) (“Florida[‘s] … civil theft [action] ... derives from two statutory sources: the criminal section setting forth the elements of Case 1:09-md-02036-JLK Document 1865 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/12/2011 Page 10 of 17 11 would be nearly impossible for an individual consumer to prove that Compass manifested “felonious intent” in its overdraft practices. More importantly, bringing such a claim without a substantial factual and legal basis for doing so, would subject the plaintiff to paying the defendant attorneys’ fees and costs.