Florida expert business lawyer David Steinfeld in Court

These videos are of Board Certified expert business lawyer David Steinfeld’s oral argument to the 5th District Court of Appeals in Florida Cardiovascular v. Rao.

Mr. Steinfeld represented Doctors Ravi and Surya Rao as the plaintiffs in the trial.  Mr. Steinfeld won at trial and the Defendant, Florida Cardiovascular appealed.  Following this oral argument, the Appellate Court unanimously affirmed the trial court’s decision and upheld the Judgment that Mr. Steinfeld obtained for his clients.

Argument on issue 1: breach of contract

Part 1 of 4

This is a video of Board Certified business attorney David Steinfeld defending a judgment he obtained at the trial court level before the appellate court.

The party that lost the trial and appealed claimed that the trial judge was wrong in finding they breached their employment contracts with Mr. Steinfeld's clients.

This segment is Mr. Steinfeld defending the trial judge and discussing why he was right in ruling in favor of Mr. Steinfeld's clients. The appellate court agreed with Mr. Steinfeld and affirmed the trial court's ruling. 

Background of the case and evidence presented at trial

Part 2 of 4

At the trial level, witnesses testify and evidence is presented to either the judge or jury so they can evaluate that and render a decision on the claim. In contrast, appeals are based entirely on and limited to the record of trial. No witnesses testify and no new evidence is presented in an appeal.

However, it is helpful for the appellate judges to have a clear understanding of how the lawsuit evolved and what the dispute was really about so they can have a sold frame of reference.

In this segment, Mr. Steinfeld tells the appellate judges about the background of the case and reviews what evidence was presented at trial so the three appellate judges have a strong understanding for their ruling of what transpired at the trial level. The appellate court ruled in favor of Mr. Steinfeld's clients and affirmed the trial court's judgment that he obtained for them.

Argument on Appellant’s 2nd issue: civil theft

Part 3 of 4

Civil theft is a unique statute in Florida. It is the civil damages component to what is basically a criminal theft. While it is not criminal and therefore does not have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, the heightened standard or clear and convincing evidence does apply. The penalty for a civil damages claim can be treble damages and attorney's fees. 

In this case, the defendant filed a counterclaim against one of Mr. Steinfeld's clients alleging civil theft of money. At trial Mr. Steinfeld defeated that claim and the other side appealed claiming the trial judge was wrong.

This clip shows Board Certified expert business lawyer David Steinfeld discussing that civil theft claim and why the trial judge was right in denying the defendant's claim. The appellate judges agreed with Mr. Steinfeld and affirmed the trial judge's ruling in his clients' favor in the case.

Argument on Appellant’s 3rd issue: the Trial Court’s sanction

Part 4 of 4

Unique to this case was a situation at the outset of the trial where the judge struck part of the defendant's counterclaim and defenses. The basis for this sanction was that the defendant hid material evidence in the case that only came to light right before trial. That evidence proved Mr. Steinfeld's case and disproved the defendant's case which is why they tried to hide it.

In this segment, Board Certified expert business attorney David Steinfeld addresses the Appellant’s third and final issue in which they claimed that the trial judge abused his discretion when he struck down their counterclaim as a sanction for hiding evidence. Because sanctions have to be tailored to the conduct the appellate court had to weigh whether the conduct in his instance was so bad that it warranted this sanction. They did and the appellate court agreed with Mr. Steinfeld and fully upheld the trial judge's sanction.