Christopher J. Blain - Vernis & Bowling

Christopher J. Blain, Esq.
Managing Attorney
Vernis & Bowling of the Gulf Coast, P.A. 2203 N. Lois Avenue Ste. 711 Tampa, FL 33607
Phone: (813) 712-1700
Email: CBlain@Florida-Law.com
Fax: (813) 712-1701
Website: www.national-law.com
V-Card Email

Verdicts and Dispositions

Joseph, Jo-Ann v. All Channel Enterprises, Inc., David Mazure, United Water Restoration Group, Inc., Tyler M. Gilman and USAA
Christopher Blain and Courtney Lucke (Tampa, FL) (Automobile Liability) obtained a favorable ruling in a court-ordered non-binding arbitration against the Plaintiff. The claim involved an automobile accident that took place in a parking lot. The Defendant was attempting to back out of a parking space when a collision took place with Plaintiff’s vehicle. Both parties provided different versions of what happened, pointing the finger at the other party at fault. Following the accident, Plaintiff complained of shoulder, back and neck pain that she received treatment for. At the arbitration, we argued that Plaintiff failed to meet her burden of proof that my client was at fault for causing the accident and that Plaintiff’s injuries were preexisting and not caused by the accident. After arguments were heard, the arbitrator came down with a ruling finding no liability against my clients and awarded nothing to the Plaintiff.
Kelley v. Sun Communities
Courtney Lucke and Christopher Blain (Tampa, FL) (Premises Liability) were successful in obtaining a Summary Judgment in the Middle District Federal Court in Florida on a Premises Liability matter. The Plaintiff tripped and fell over an uneven sidewalk joint while walking his dog in the community where he lived. Plaintiff filed this action asserting the owner, Sun Communities, was negligent for failing to maintain the sidewalk in a safe condition. Although we admitted that Defendant owed a duty to maintain its premises in a reasonably safe condition and warn of known dangers, we argued that no duty was breached as Plaintiff as the condition was open and obvious and therefore not dangerous and that Plaintiff had actual knowledge of the condition living in the community. We further argued that the incident itself was solely due to Plaintiff failing to watch where he was walking. As a result of the fall, Plaintiff suffered injuries to his knee that required surgery. The court agreed with our position and further noted that “the landowner is not required to foreclose all risk that the invitee (Plaintiff) will injure himself during an inattentive moment.” Sun Communities’ Motion for Summary Judgment was granted.
Savvas v. Wawa
Christopher Blain and Courtney Lucke (Tampa, FL) (Premises Liability) obtained a Directed Verdict before the Honorable Judge Byrd in Pasco County, Florida. This matter concerned an alleged slip and fall incident that took place at the WaWa store in New Port Richey, Florida. Plaintiff was claiming to have suffered a number of medical conditions as a result of the fall including neck, low back, and knee pain. Furthered, Plaintiff was claiming to have struck his head as a result of the fall resulting in him suffering ringing in his ear. At trial, Plaintiff argued that WaWa caused a dangerous condition, specifically the floor near the entrance was slippery that resulted in his fall. It was our position that WaWa maintained their store reasonably, including having wet floor cones out warning customers of a possible wet floor. After Plaintiff presented his case, we moved for Directed Verdict on the ground that Plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case that WaWa was negligent and failed to maintain their store reasonably thereby not meeting his liability burden and also argued that Plaintiff failed to establish damages as related to the subject incident. After arguments, the court granted our Directed Verdict.
Tonya Oliver v. Foxwood at Trinity Community Association
Christopher Blain and Courtney Lucke (Tampa, FL) (Fair Housing) obtained Summary Judgment in a HOA claim. The Plaintiffs alleged that the Association failed to provide them with a reasonable accommodation under the Fair Housing Act for a child’s disability by not allowing the installation of a handicapped child street sign and by not allowing Plaintiffs to install a fence in their backyard to train the disabled child’s service dog. They also alleged retaliation under the FHA due to a number of deed restriction violation correspondences the Association sent to the Plaintiffs following their alleged requests for accommodations along with the Plaintiffs’ request for Association records that allegedly went unanswered. It was our position that Plaintiffs’ claims were barred by the Statute of Limitations as well as the fact that Plaintiff’s alleged requests were requests for modifications under the FHA rather than requests for accommodations. With regards to the retaliation claim, it was our position that Plaintiff failed to establish a causal link between the alleged accommodation requests and deed violations/records requests. The matter was filed in Federal Court in the Middle District of Florida. Courtney Lucke prepared and filed the Motion for Summary Judgment which was entered in our favor on all counts. The court dismissed Plaintiffs’ pendant state claim due to the fact that all federal issues were resolved through the Summary Judgment.
Rodrigues v. WaWa
Christopher Blain and Ryan Sainz (Tampa, FL) (Premises Liability) obtained a defense verdict for WaWa. The matter concerned an alleged slip and fall in a Wawa. Immediately after the fall, the Plaintiff was transported to the hospital and diagnosed with a broken hip and fractured pelvis. As a result of this diagnosis, the Plaintiff underwent emergency total hip replacement surgery. The Plaintiff claimed that she fell shortly after entering. Specifically, she claimed that she fell while walking down the chip aisle. The only other eye witness testimony to this incident was that of an independent witness. This individual provided information that the Plaintiff did not slip. Rather, she sat down on the floor. Despite this conflicting evidence, the Plaintiff was adamant that her version was the only reasonable explanation for her alleged injuries.

During her deposition the Plaintiff testified that she did not know what caused her to fall, she did not see anything on the ground, and only felt a “splash” on her face. However, the Plaintiff did not know where this splash came from. From the outset of this action, it was undisputed that a Wawa employee mopped the floor prior to the Plaintiff entering the store. Both parties retained liability experts to perform examinations of the flooring surface of the subject Wawa.

Prior to trial, Mr. Blain filed a motion to strike the Plaintiff’s liability expert which was granted. As such, Plaintiff entered trial without a liability expert. During trial, the Plaintiff presented testimony of the Plaintiff, 3 Wawa employees and their Orthopedic surgeon. The testimony from the surgeon was undisputed that a fractured hip and fractured pelvis were diagnosed. Furthermore, it was undisputed that the Plaintiff underwent a hip surgery. However, at the close of Plaintiff’s case our argument remained that Wawa did not cause this injury or the alleged incident. The Plaintiff herself could not provide any testimony as to what caused her to fall, if there was anything on the ground, any substance on her skin or on her clothing at the time of the fall. In addition, the Wawa employees called by the Plaintiff all testified that there were multiple “wet floor cones” on the ground throughout the area where Plaintiff was found on the ground.

During our case in chief, we called our liability expert who testified that the floor exceeded the industry standard of 0.50 for coefficient friction. This provided information that the floor was not slippery at the time of the incident. Finally, the independent witness and his wife were called to testify. The independent witness testified the as he exited the restroom he witnessed the Plaintiff sit down slowly. At the time of this incident, he was of the belief that the Plaintiff was having a medical episode such as a heart attack. He also testified that he witnessed multiple “wet floor cones” throughout the area of this incident prior to and at the time he witnessed the Plaintiff go to the ground. Finally, he testified that he recalled the flooring surface being dry as he went to the bathroom and when he saw the Plaintiff go to the ground. This witnesses’ wife also confirmed the presence of the cones as well as the fact that the floor was dry at the time that she observed the Plaintiff on the ground.

At the close of evidence in the Plaintiff’s case and our case, a motion for directed verdict was made as to liability and damages. The argument was that Plaintiff failed to present any direct evidence that 1) there was a condition on the ground at the time of this incident, 2) that the condition caused the Plaintiff to fall and 3) that Wawa failed to adequately warn the Plaintiff. The Court was provided with overwhelming amount of case law which held that inference stacking was impermissible when based in circumstantial evidence and when the initial inference was not established to the exclusion of all reasonable inferences. Initially, this motion was denied as to liability but granted as to the issue of future medicals. However, following the close of our case the court reserved ruling on the issue of liability.

During closing argument, the Plaintiff demanded over $450,000 in damages for past medical, past pain and suffering and future pain and suffering. The jury returned a verdict in under 20 minutes and found no liability on Wawa.
Plaintiff v Nativity Catholic Church
Christopher Blain (Gulf Coast/Tampa, FL) (Premises Liability). The matter concerned a trip and fall incident that took place at the Nativity Catholic Church in Brandon, Florida. The plaintiff tripped over a baptismal font in the back of the church resulting in her claimed neck, back, both shoulders and left knee injuries. She had a recommendation for surgery from her treating physician for injuries to her knee and shoulder, which she related to the subject incident. Plaintiff incurred over $47,000 in past medical specials. We picked a jury and presented opening statements. Plaintiff called two witnesses before lunch. Plaintiff’s last demand prior to trial was $50,000. Following opposing counsel’s initial evidence presentation, and in response to the defenses presentation, opposing counsel approached us with a demand of $5,000 or whatever we could get” to resolve the matter. The matter was resolved for the nominal amount of $2,500.

Areas Of Practice

Automobile Liability (PIP/PD/BI/UM)
Bad Faith/Extra Contractual Litigation
Civil Litigation
Condominium and Homeowners' Association Litigation
Construction and Construction Defect Litigation
Coverage & Declaratory Judgment Actions
Cyber Security & Data Privacy
Director & Officer Liability (D&O)
Employment Law/Employment Litigation
Errors & Omissions Liability (E&O)
First and Third Party Property and Casualty Claims
General Civil Litigation
Government Law
Liability Defense
Medical Malpractice
Negligent Security
PIP/Personal Injury Protection Litigation
Product Liability
SIU/Suspicious & Fraudulent Claims
Subrogation Claims
Uninsured/Underinsured Motorist Liability
Wrongful Death

Bar & Court Admission

Florida Bar
Illinois Bar
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
U.S. District Court of the Central District of Illinois
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois

Education

Graduate:
Barry University School of Law, Juris Doctorate, 2002
Undergraduate:
Lake Forest College, B.A. degree in Political Science, 1996

Nationally Board Certified Trial Advocate
Florida Bar Board Certified Civil Trial Lawyer
Florida Supreme Court Certified Circuit Court Mediator

Christopher Blain is the managing attorney of the Tampa, Florida office. He has worked all aspects of the insurance industry. He is an expert in Civil Trial and is Board Certified by the Florida Bar and Nationally Board Certified by the National Board of Trial Advocacy. He was born in Addison, Illinois which is a suburb outside of Chicago. He attended college at Lake Forest College where he graduated in 1996. He continued his education at Barry University, School of Law where he received his Juris Doctor in 2002. While in law school, Chris worked under the Honorable Judge Walter Komanski at the Ninth Judicial Circuit, where he researched complex civil litigation issues.

Chris has tried numerous matters to jury verdicts in both State and Federal Courts. He has litigated general liability defense work ranging from handling lawsuits involving claims of wrongful death, premises liability, insurance coverage, auto negligence, negligent security and property claims. Chris has also represented Homeowner/Condominium Associations and their Board Members before HUD, State and Federal Courts regarding disputes arising over deed restrictions, enforcement of those restrictions and alleged discrimination. In addition, Chris has also lectured extensively in these fields where he has been a featured speaker at continuing education seminars around the United States on a variety of insurance defense and litigation topics.

Chris is admitted to practice law in all State Courts in Florida as well as all Federal Courts which include the Northern, Southern and Middle Districts of Florida. He is admitted to practice in the Eleventh Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals. Further, he is admitted to practice in all courts in the State of Illinois.

In his free time, Chris enjoys being active in the Tampa area. He is an assistant soccer coach for his son’s team and can also be found cheering on his daughter at her drama class performances.

Footer