Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...The Court further stated, "Although confidentiality can never be restored to a document already disclosed, a court can repair much of the damage done by disclosure by preventing or restricting use of the document at trial". Id. at 938 (citation omitted); accord Comments (Law Revision Council Note — 1976) to Fla.Stat. § 90.508 (Addressing a situation where the contents of a confidential document have become publicly known because a court has erroneously compelled its production, the comments state, "While confidentiality, once destroyed, is not susceptible of res...

...nce § 507.1 (1977). Florida would thus seem to be aligned with the traditional view holding that any disclosure, whether inadvertent or intentional, waives the privilege. Defendant Cutter, however, relies for additional support on Florida Statutes, Section 90.508....

...lled erroneously. While confidentiality, once destroyed, is not susceptible of restoration, prohibiting the use of privileged information against the holder is believed to afford some remedy for the holder's expectation of privacy. 6B Fla.Stat.Ann., § 90.508 at 527....

...Disclosure of the confidential memorandum was in no way compelled by the Court. Rather, Defendant produced the document in response to a standard discovery request. Further, the accompanying Note expressly states that "confidentiality, once destroyed, is not susceptible to restoration." 6B Fla.Stat.Ann., § 90.508 at 527....

..."Usually waiver in one proceeding is waiver in all proceedings." Charles W. Ehrhardt, Florida Evidence § 507.1, at 470 (2007 ed.); Permian Corp. v. United States, 665 F.2d 1214 (D.C.Cir.1981); Navajo Nation v. Peabody Holding Co., 209 F.Supp.2d 269 (D.D.C. 2002). Further, section 90.508, Florida Statutes, provides that evidence or disclosure of privileged matter is inadmissible against the holder (client) only if the statement or disclosure "was compelled erroneously by the court or made without opportunity to claim t...

...o do with [the murder]." [4] Suppose Mordenti had been executed following his first conviction and sentence before this information was revealed by the State? What confidence would the public have in the criminal justice system? [5] I recognize that section 90.508, Florida Statutes (2006), renders inadmissible those disclosures that are erroneously compelled by the court; however, this section does not apply to these facts because the statements here are not sought to be admitted against the holder of the privilege, Larry Royston....

...Thus, the court erred in ordering its release to the appellees. [2] Having established that the Child Protection Team report was confidential and was exempt from disclosure, even from the courts and the parents, section 90.510 does not alter this result. Section 90.508, Florida Statutes (1993), provides, in pertinent part: Evidence of a statement or other disclosure of privileged matter is inadmissible against the holder of the privilege if the statement or disclosure was compelled erroneously by the court.......

*80 part of any claim or defense. § 90.508(4), Fla. Stat. (2018). None of those exceptions

...In such cases, the harm that will be done by the improper disclosure cannot be redressed on appeal from the final judgment. This remedy is not appropriate, however, if the information protected by the trade secret privilege has been disclosed by the time the privilege is asserted. Section 90.508 provides that "[e]vidence of a statement or other disclosure of privileged matter is inadmissible against the holder of the privilege if the statement or disclosure was compelled erroneously by the court or made without opportunity to...

privileges asserted here are based in part on section 90.508 of the Florida Evidence Code, which provides

section 90.510 does not alter this result. Section 90.508, Florida Statutes (1993), provides, in pertinent