Pace v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon Trust Co.

6 Citing cases

  1. EMI Sun Vill., Inc. v. Catledge

    No. 16-11841 (11th Cir. Jun. 28, 2019)   Cited 10 times
    Affirming an award of the attorney's fees in addition to monetary sanction against the law firm raising objectively frivolous claims

    The Florida Supreme Court did not address LatAm in Debrincat, nor has the court addressed it since, so LatAm appears to still be good law. See Pace v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon. Tr. Co. Nat'l Ass'n, 224 So. 3d 342, 343 n.2 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) (citing LatAm after Debrincat was issued for the proposition that the litigation privilege applies to abuse of process claims); see also, e.g., Pardo v. State, 596 So. 2d 665, 665 (Fla. 1992) ("This Court has stated that the decisions of the district courts of appeal represent the law of Florida unless and until they are overruled by this Court.") (quotation marks and brackets omitted).

  2. Taser Int'l v. Phazzer Elecs.

    6:16-cv-366-PGB-LHP (M.D. Fla. Jan. 27, 2023)

    (“To the extent that Defendants' counterclaims are based on the filing of lawsuits, the Court agrees that the litigation privilege bars such claims.” (citing Pace v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon Tr. Co. Natl Ass'n, 224 So.3d 342, 345 (Fla. 5th Dist. Ct. App. 2017) (“In the context of a tortious interference with business relationships claim, the act of filing the complaint is subject to absolute immunity under the litigation privilege.”)))

  3. Blue-Grace Logistics LLC v. Fahey

    653 F. Supp. 3d 1172 (M.D. Fla. 2023)   Cited 2 times

    "In the context of a tortious interference with a business relationship claim, the act of filing the complaint is subject to absolute immunity under the litigation privilege." Pace v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon Tr. Co. Nat'l Ass'n, 224 So. 3d 342, 345 (Fla. 5th D.C.A. 2017).

  4. Royal Palm Vill. Residents, Inc. v. Slider

    8:19-cv-874-CEH-SPF (M.D. Fla. Sep. 15, 2021)

    Additionally, “[a]bsolute immunity covers ongoing litigation and ‘conduct that is necessarily preliminary to judicial proceedings.' ” Pace v. Bank of New York Mellon Tr. Co. Nat'l Ass'n, 224 So.3d 342, 344 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) (quoting AGM Invs., LLC v. Bus. Law Grp., P.A., 219 So.3d 920, 924 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)). “Statements ‘necessarily preliminary' to judicial proceedings include pre-suit communications required by statute or by contract as a condition precedent to suit.”

  5. Scopelliti v. McClean

    Case No: 8:20-cv-00104-CEH-CPT (M.D. Fla. Feb. 26, 2021)

    The litigation privilege may also apply to statements or acts occurring during quasi-judicial proceedings. See Pace v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon Trust Co. Nat'l Ass'n, 224 So. 3d 342, 344 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) ("Statements or acts are covered by absolute immunity under the litigation privilege if they are (1) made or committed in the course of judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings and (2) are 'connected with, or relevant or material to, the cause in hand or subject of inquiry.'").

  6. Wyndham Vacation Ownership, Inc. v. Montgomery Law Firm, LLC

    Case No: 8:19-cv-1895-T-36CPT (M.D. Fla. May. 5, 2020)   Cited 4 times

    To the extent that Defendants' counterclaims are based on the filing of lawsuits, the Court agrees that the litigation privilege bars such claims. Pace v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon Tr. Co. Nat'l Ass'n, 224 So. 3d 342, 345 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017) ("In the context of a tortious interference with business relationships claim, the act of filing the complaint is subject to absolute immunity under the litigation privilege."). However, it is not apparent that Defendants' claims are based exclusively on the lawsuits.