This preserves the identity of the separate causes of action and does not result in duplicate or overlapping compensation. The defendant's reliance on Association for Retarded Citizens, Dade County, Inc. v. State Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative Servs., 619 So.2d 452 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), is misplaced. In the present case, there was a prior judicial determination of Adaly's share of the Dadeland Dodge settlement proceeds, a completely different situation from that in Association for Retarded Citizens.Association for Retarded Citizens is also inapplicable because it did not involve the claim of a minor.

The element of Florida law implicated in this appeal is not a party's substantive right to a setoff; instead, the rule against holding "an allocation hearing by the trial court in order to apportion the proceeds of a private settlement agreement" concerns the procedure for crediting the amount of a settled claim. Ass'n for Retarded Citizens, Dade County, Inc. v. State Dep't of Health Rehab. Servs., 619 So.2d 452, 453 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1993); see also Mendez v. Simon, 739 So.2d 101, 103-04 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1999) (waiving the rule and requiring a judicial apportionment when a minor is involved). State law ordinarily does not govern the procedures of federal courts.

Neither party has provided the Court with a reliable framework for apportioning damages, which is fatal to their claims. Trovillion Const. & Dev., Inc. V. Mid-Continent Cas. Co., 2014 WL 201678, *9 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 17, 2014); Association for Retarded Citizens, Dade Cnty., Inc. v. State of Florida Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 619 So.2d 452, 454 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993) (citing Dionese v. City of West Palm Beach, 500 So.2d 1347, 1351 (Fla. 1987) (the language contained in the settlement agreement determines post-settlement apportionment)). In the Underlying Lawsuit, on December 31, 2014, the Court issued an Order Denying Defendant Anova Food, LLC's Two Motions to Strike, and Denying Defendant Anova Food, LLC's Motion for Summary Judgment, and Granting, in part, and Denying, in part, the Kowalski Plaintiffs' Counter Motion for Partial Summary Judgment. (ECF No. 432 in 11-cv-00795HG-RLP).

Id.Similarly, in Association for Retarded Citizens v. State Dep't of Health & Rehabilitation Service, 619 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), the court reversed summary judgment in favor of the indemnitee, HRS, in order to determine what portion of the settlement agreement was actually covered by the parties' indemnity contract. The court reasoned:

The Court must not punish plaintiff, by barring indemnification, for having entered into a settlement agreement with the homeowners; instead, the Court must determine whether plaintiff settled claims for which it could seek indemnification. Association for Retarded Citizens v. State Dep't of Health and Rehabilitative Servs., 619 So.2d 452, 454 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1993) (recognizing need to balance liability rules against "public policy which encourages settlements"). Plaintiff must establish (1) that its settlement was attributable to its vicarious liability to the homeowners, and (2) that the settlement was reasonable.

Our conclusion that the contract at issue is private due to the subject matter, rather than the nature of one of the parties, as Lee Memorial would have us decide, is also consistent with the way in which the term "private contract" has been used in case law. SeeAss'n. for Retarded Citizens, Dade County v. State, Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. , 619 So.2d 452, 454 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (referring to a settlement agreement between a private citizen and a state agency concerning a lawsuit by the citizen against the agency as "private"); Palm Beach County Classroom Teacher's Ass'n v. Sch. Bd. of Palm Beach County , 411 So.2d 1375, 1376 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (stating that "the provisions of a private agreement entered into by public bodies," referring to a teachers' union and a school board, "cannot be used to circumvent the requirements" of the Government in the Sunshine Act); Mills v. Doyle , 407 So.2d 348, 350-51 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (holding that the same "private" contract at issue in Palm Beach County Classroom Teacher's Association could not create exemptions from the public records law); J.C. Vereen & Sons, Inc. v. City of Miami , 397 So.2d 979, 983 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (recognizing a contract between a municipality and a landowner as a "private contract"). Although these references are made in passing, as Lee Memorial argues, rather than in an effort to define "priv