LAKELAND — A Largo psychiatrist will be allowed to compel deposition from 18 companies following a state appeals court opinion issued earlier this month.
In its 13-page opinion issued April 15, a Florida Second District Court of Appeal three-judge panel granted a petition filed by Dr. Michael Bojkovic and quashed a lower court order that barred the deposition.
Bojkovic asked the appeals court to review a lower court's order that declined without prejudice his request to compel depositions from 18 prospective deponents, all of them companies.
In addition to Bojkovic, other petitioners in the case are Hepco Data, LLC, Focus Health, Inc. and MSKLM Holdings, LLC.
The case stems from a dispute over ownership of "certain data" generated from a foot sanitation device for which the respondent companies own patents and Bojkovic tried to buy in 2015, according to the background portion of the opinion.
"Respondents initiated the underlying action seeking declaratory relief determining the parties' rights to the data, arguing the nonexistence of an agreement where the parties never formalized their agreement as contemplated by the letter of intent," the opinion said.
The petitioners sought to depose Hepco Medical, LLC, Hepco Holdings, LLC, Hepco Ventures, LLC, Kitty Hawk, LLC, Mueller Holdings Group, LLC, HJA Medical, LLC and MGM Strategic Consulting, LLC. The companies are respondents in the appeal.
The petitioners argued that Pinellas County Circuit Court Judge Thomas H. Minkoff was wrong when he entered no order finding about materiality of the proposed deponents and good cause as required under Florida Law.
"We find merit in both issues," the opinion said. "The trial court's blanket order denying the motion to compel the 18 depositions and granting a protective order, without explanation, constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of the law causing petitioners material injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law."
Appeal Court Judge Andrea Teves Smith wrote the decision in which Judge Darryl C. Casanueva and Judge Craig C. Villanti concurred.
Bojkovic and the petitioning company have claimed an agreement does exist as evidence revealed over the "course of dealings" over three years, the use of a $250,000 contribution and ownership rights over the data.
The respondent companies sought, and got, a protective order from depositions.
"Because we find Petitioners were entitled to depose the proffered, and unrebutted, 18 deponents as material witnesses, we hold the trial court's blanket denial of this discovery and contemporaneous entry of a protective order, was a departure from the essential requirements of the law," the opinion said.