Steven Sundook - Vernis & Bowling

Steven Sundook, Esq.
Managing Attorney
Vernis & Bowling of Southwest Florida, P.A. 2369 West First Street Fort Myers, FL 33901
Phone: (239) 334-3035
Email: SSundook@Florida-Law.com
Fax: (239) 334-7702
Website: www.national-law.com
V-Card Email LinkedIn

Verdicts and Dispositions

Perri v. Beecroft
Steven Sundook (Ft. Myers, FL) (Premises Liability) obtained a Defense Verdict in the case of Gino Perri v Ron A. Beecroft in Lee County Circuit Court June 7-10, 2022.

Gino Perri, a 51 year old retired postmaster from northern New Jersey, rode his bicycle onto the premises of JetBlue Park, also known as Fenway South, on December 22, 2017. He and his wife rode their bikes onto freshly poured wet cement squares on a walkway just outside the spring training baseball stadium. He claimed that he rode across the wet cement and abruptly stopped when his bike hit the lip of a dry square on the opposite side of the wet one he had just ridden across. He claimed this caused his neck to “jerk” forward. He testified that he had ridden his bicycle in that area without incident 200 times in the previous couple of years, since he first moved to Florida from NJ, after retiring from his job.

He retired early due to injuries from on-the-job workers’ compensation accidents, including slipping on ice, lifting heavy postal trays and an “electrocution” incident in which electricity went from his right hand up his right arm into his chest. He underwent two prior significant lumbar surgeries and had complained of symptoms consistent with carpel tunnel syndrome and/or cervical radiculopathy. He was determined to be permanently and totally disabled prior to moving to Florida. He was actively treating with a pain management doctor at the time of the incident. He was taking narcotic pain medication, but claims he tolerated them well with no side effects.

Plaintiff’s pain management doctor referred him to a neurosurgeon, who concluded he had a cervical radiculopathy and proceeded to perform an anterior cervical discectomy, which relieved some symptoms. After continuous complaints of right hand tingling, pain and numbness, as well as problems gripping and other functional problems with his right hand, a second open posterior multilevel cervical fusion was performed.

Plaintiff claimed he had trouble sleeping, could no longer bike ride, bowl or be intimate with his wife. Our client, Ronald A Beecroft, is a small family-owned contractor. At the time of the incident, the company had had been told by Lee County Parks and Rec that the Park would be closed on the date of the concrete walkway repair. We argued that that the workers on the date of incident had no reason to anticipate the plaintiff’s presence in the area they were working. They did not barricade the area of fresh cement because they were told the park was closed to the public that day.

Plaintiff argued that the area should have been barricaded and that the Plaintiff had no way of knowing the park was closed. The gates to the park were open. There were no cones, barricades, or other indication to him that the park was closed that day. Lee County had been a party defendant but was dropped weeks before trial.

The Plaintiff’s status on the land was a major legal issue. We were able to have the court give instructions that Plaintiff was an uninvited licensee. We had a biomechanical expert to testify about the minimal forces involved in the incident, A CME doctor who testified the surgeries were not related to the bike incident and a Lee County Parks and Rep director, who testified the park was closed and our client was told no members of the public would be present that day.

Plaintiff’s treating doctor admitted in video trial testimony he had not reviewed prior records and attributed cause of surgery to the bike incident only because Plaintiff told him so. He said if there was evidence of similar symptoms prior to the bike incident, that would affect his opinion on causation.

We obtained Plaintiff’s Department of Labor workers’ compensation file fairly close to the trial date. It showed complaints similar to the ones made following the bike incident. There was a Department of Labor IME Plaintiff used to apply to continue his permanent total disability workers’ compensation claim. In the IME report, Plaintiff claimed he was unable to bike or bowl 8 months prior to our bike incident. There were handwritten forms filled out by the plaintiff himself regarding his pain and restrictions 8 months prior to our incident. Plaintiff also claimed he heared a news report that the Red Sox box office would be open, that he checked the schedule on his phone and was excited his beloved NY Mets were on the upcoming 2018 spring training schedule. We checked the 2018 spring schedule, and the Mets were not on the Red Sox Jet Blue spring schedule. Plaintiff did not look good in cross examination.

Plaintiff’s credibility was a big issue for the defense. Plaintiff asked for over $900,000.00 in his closing argument. After 55 minutes the jury reached a verdict for the Defense. We are moving for attorney fees pursuant to a $2,500.00 PFS served in July 2020.
Wells v Regions Bank
Steven Sundook and Taylor Ligman (Ft. Myers, FL) (Premises Liability/Slip and Fall) obtained a Defense Verdict following a three-day jury trial in Sarasota, Florida. Plaintiff, a 66-year-old woman, fell in the lobby of a North Venice, Florida Regions Bank on October 11, 2018. Ms. Wells claimed she tripped over a “transition strip” between a carpeted area and tile area. Applicable codes require any change in elevations be no greater the ¼ inch. An expert hired by Ms. Wells’ lawyers opined that the transition strip measured slightly above ¼ inch and was the cause of her fall.

Plaintiff had a long history of knee problems dating back to at least 2009. She had previously had surgery to repair meniscal tears in both knees and had required total knee replacement of both knees since 2017. By July 2018, her left knee pain was so bad it was affecting her ability to do activities of daily life (ADLs). She continued to have her left knee injected. 11 weeks before she fell in the bank she had another injection in her left knee. She reported the pain was so bad it made it difficult for her to walk.

Plaintiff claimed she was in no pain or discomfort at the time of the fall. She made a deposit for her ailing mother on that day. Surveillance video showed her walking into the bank and walking across tile to carpet and back to tile to the teller window. After she made her deposit, she walked from tile to carpet and then fell in the area of transition back to tile. Unfortunately, the frame rate of the surveillance video was such that the video showed her before and after she fell but did not show her beginning to fall or show what caused her to fall.

The Defense expert measured several areas of the transition strip between the tile and carpet and found them all to be less than ¼ inch meeting the applicable code requirements. In Plaintiff’s rebuttal case, Plaintiff’s expert testified that the Defense expert’s use of a “profile gauge” was subjective and dependent upon how much force was used to push down on the gauge. The defense expert testified that the Plaintiff’s expert use of a measuring tape held at an angle and photographed form above produced “parallax error”, and that photos of Plaintiff’s expert showed him compressing the carpet to achieve his measurement of slightly over ¼ inch.

Plaintiff testified that the gash in her knee was very painful, required staples to close without the use of anesthesia and became infected. She was required to wear a full leg brace for over two months.

Plaintiff blackboarded approximately $20,000.00 in medical bills and asked for $150,000.00 in closing arguments. After 1½ hours, the jury returned a verdict of no negligence on the part of the bank causing Plaintiff’s fall. We are moving for a judgment against the Plaintiff for attorney fees pursuant to a proposal for settlement for $1,500.00 made in 2019.
Sabrina Moore v. Maritta and Kenneth Stevens
Steven Sundook and Phillip Fairman (Ft. Myers, FL) (Automobile Liability) obtained a Defense Verdict in Lee County Circuit Court in a three-day trial of an auto negligence case. Plaintiff’s counsel requested the jury award $171,000.00 in medical bills and $4,200,000.00 million in pain and suffering. The jury awarded $35,000.00 in medical bills, found the Plaintiff to be 40% at fault for the accident, and also found that she had no permanent injury. After a PIP setoff and comparative negligence, net verdict was only $11,000.00. The defense previously served a proposal for settlement for $110,000.00 and will be seeking an attorney fee award. A “high low” agreement was offered but the Plaintiff refused to go below “$250K/$1 million.” There was also a prior nonbinding arbitration award of $225,000.00.

The case arose out of a March 3, 2018 accident in which the 75-year-old defendant driver was leaving a restaurant with his wife and sister-in-law. Traffic to his right was in gridlock. He waited until a driver in the gridlock traffic stopped to let him through to turn left. He waited, looking to his right for oncoming headlights to make a safe left turn.

Seeing no oncoming headlights, he slowly turned left and then accelerated. He admitted his vision was partially obstructed as he looked through the windows of parked cars to his right before turning. His wife testified she also saw no oncoming headlights as they turned. After 5-6 seconds he felt a push from behind, realized his car had been hit, pulled over to the side of the road and called 911.

Plaintiff, a 42-year-old single mom, was coming back from the fair with an ex-boyfriend and her adult disabled child. She claimed the defendant’s vehicle suddenly partially pulled into her lane and stopped. The first thing she saw was his brake lights. She braked and turned to the right to try to avoid the collision but struck the right rear side of the defendant vehicle with her right front quarter panel. Her ex-boyfriend claimed the defense vehicle was stopped at angle, and not fully in the lane at impact.

Plaintiff only complained of some chest pain from her seatbelt and refused medical treatment from EMS at the scene. The next day she went to urgent care complaining of a myriad of areas of pain and discomfort, including to her right shoulder. She followed up with a chiropractor, neurologist and eventually returned to an orthopedic surgeon who had treated her in the past.

She had two prior car accidents in 2006 and 2010. She had right shoulder arthroscopic surgery in 2006 after the first accident and again in 2010 after the second accident. She had a third right shoulder arthroscopic surgery following our 2018 accident.

She went a year and a half until July 2020 without treating with the orthopedic surgeon, Dr. Kagan. She had an injury at home in January 2020 when she felt pain in her shoulder while reaching behind her to close a door. When Dr. Kagan saw her in the summer of 2020, his report was mostly a cut and paste of his March 2019 MMI report. He referred her to physical therapy and never mentioned anything about discussing future surgery with the Plaintiff, much less recommending it. Plaintiff’s counsel claimed the 2020 “door” injury related back to our March 2018 accident.

In November 2020 Plaintiff’s lawyer produced a “confirming” letter he wrote to Dr. Kagan in which he asked Dr Kagan whether Plaintiff would need a future surgery. Dr Kagan signed a form attached to the letter outlining the future surgery he recommended to her lawyer. When Dr. Kagan’s video testimony for trial was done in May 2021, he admitted it was unusual to not examine a patient, get an MRI or have any discussion with a patient before recommending a future surgery. Plaintiff’s counsel also had him testify that Plaintiff might need a second future surgery if the first was not successful, which would be open surgery using cadaver bone, which another doctor would have to perform. He admitted the need for the second future surgery was “sheer speculation”.

Our CME doctor testified that Plaintiff had general laxity in her shoulder, that it was a chronic condition not related to our 2018 accident, and that he did not find her 2018 surgery to be related to it, or believe she needed any surgery in the future.

In closing argument Plaintiff’s counsel argued that our opening statement, in which we said Defendant was not a cause of the accident, was proven to be false, that Defendant “darted out” in front of the Plaintiff cutting her off. It was further argued that she had lost the use of her right dominant arm, and this was almost like an arm amputation case. The total award requested from the jury was just under $4,400,000.00.

We argued that our client was at most only partially at fault for the accident after he had a “lapse in judgment” turning onto the roadway, but that he was accelerating away, and not stopped partially as Plaintiff claimed, and that she rear-ended his vehicle.

The jury found Plaintiff 40% at fault and found the 2018 surgery not related to the 2018 accident, found no permanent injury, and awarded $0 in pain and suffering damages. It also awarded $35,000.00 in total medical bills, resulting in a $11,000.00 net verdict after applying the PIP reduction.
Michael Gilbert v. Coastal QSR. LLC
Steven Sundook, Esq. and Alexis Barkis, Esq. (SW FL, Ft. Myers) (Premises Liaibility) obtained a dismissal with prejudice and award of attorney fees against the Plaintiff in the case of Michael Gilbert v. Coastal QSR. LLC et al. Coastal operates a Taco Bell in Arcadia Florida. Mr. Gilbert claimed he had been sitting a table in the restaurant, and then went to get a drink when he slipped on a wet floor. He claimed he may have possibly lost consciousness. He was diagnosed with a head injury and ankle pain in the emergency room. A month later, Alexander Fakaded, MD of Med-manage Group, Inc. reviewed CTs and MRIs and his impression was 1) headache, 2) mild concussion; 3) cervical sprain/strain with herniated disc at C5-6; and 4) lumbar sprain/strain. The Plaintiff later underwent a bilateral L3-S1 lumbar rhizotomy at Lake Worth Surgical Center, and a C5-6 maximal discectomy with arthroplasty or fusion, at the Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center, both performed by Dr. Thomas Roush. The Plaintiff’s medical bills totaled over $185,000 and he was also making a lost income claim. Dr. Roush is well known to treat patients involved in personal injury litigation, and his charges are often well above usual and customary amounts.

Through the course of investigation of Mr. Gilbert’s claim, it was discovered that his real name is Victor Hugo Delgado-Garro” according to a federal indictment our investigator discovered. In the Federal indictment the Plaintiff is charged with knowingly, willfully, and falsely representing himself to be Michael Gilbert. It was learned that he was being held in Miami at the Krome Detention Center awaiting trial. He was later moved to the Charlotte County Jail to await trial on federal charges of impersonating a US citizen (Michael Gilbert). Prior to his arrest, he was on probation for felony altering of vehicle ID numbers, for which he was convicted of under the name Michael Gilbert. The real Michael gilbert in New York found out that the Plaintiff was using his social security number. The federal government decided to prosecute him for identity theft, rather than deport him.

In the motion to dismiss for fraud on the court, it was argued that dismissal of the case with prejudice was appropriate as a sanction because of the Plaintiff’s scheme to interfere with the judicial system’s ability to impartially adjudicate a matter amounts to committing a fraud upon the court. Ironically, the Plaintiff served a proposal for settlement in the amount of $ 1 million just as the information concerning the Plaintiff’s identity theft was discovered. The Court granted the motion to strike the Proposal for settlement , dismissed the case with prejudice and ordered the Plaintiff to pay attorney fees as sanctions for perpetrating the fraud on the court.
Schultheis v. JP Morgan Chase
Steven Sundook, Esq. and Alexis Barkis, Esq. (SW FL, Ft. Myers) (Premises Liaibility) obtained a Summary Final Judgment in the case styled Schultheis v. JP Morgan Chase,.Mrs. Schultheis was walking in the lobby of a Chase Bank in North Naples when she claimed that she suddenly and without warning, slipped on the very wet floor and fell violently to the ground”. She claimed that as a result of the fall she suffered a full thickness rotator cuff tear to her right shoulder, and vertical tear through the body of the medial meniscus of her left knee, which required surgery. Medical bills totaled over $40,000. Although she qualified for Medicare, the 79 year old Plaintiff’s medical bills were not submitted to Medicare. They were all outstanding on letters of protection to her doctors and other medical providers.

At her deposition, she testified that although it had rained earlier in the day, it wasn’t raining at all when she parked her car next to the sidewalk, outside the bank. There were no puddles or any standing water in the parking lot or on the sidewalk, as she walked toward the bank. She first walked through a marble tiled vestibule area and then proceeded into the bank lobby. She walked across the marble tiled floor to a bank teller. She then walked to the right of a narrow, high table used to write checks and deposit slips, was looking where she was walking and did not see any water or other liquid on the floor. There was nothing to obstruct her vision of the floor. She fell as she reached the end of the table. She did not feel either of her feet slipping. She claims she saw water on the floor after she fell. She never told anyone who assisted her, or with whom she spoke after she fell, that there was water on the floor. She did not see anyone wipe up anything off the floor. She never told anyone at the bank at any time that she thought she had slipped on water. She did not know how the water she claimed she saw on the floor came to be there, or how long it had been there.

In the Motion for Summary Final Judgment, it was argued that _768.0755(1) Florida Statutes applied, and that under the statute a person who slips and falls on a transitory foreign substance in a business establishment, … must prove that the business establishment had actual or constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition and should have taken action to remedy it.” In granting the motion for Summary Final Judgment, the court agreed that, in viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the Plaintiff, she had not shown that the water, she now claimed was on the floor, existed for such a length of time that the Defendant should have known about it.

The Court Entered Final Summary Judgment against the Plaintiff dismissing the case with Prejudice and taxing costs against the Plaintiff.

Areas Of Practice

Appellate Practice
Automobile Liability (PIP/PD/BI/UM)
Condominium and Homeowners' Association Litigation
Construction and Construction Defect Litigation
Cyber Security & Data Privacy
Director & Officer Liability (D&O)
First and Third Party Property and Casualty Claims
Medical Malpractice
Product Liability
Public Entities

Bar & Court Admission

Florida Bar
Federal District Court for the Southern and Middle Districts of Florida

Education

Graduate:
University of Miami School of Law, Juris Doctor, 1982
Undergraduate:
University of Massachusetts, B.A. in Political Science, 1978

Distinguised Peer Review Rated by Martindale-Hubbell

Steven Sundook was born in Boston, Massachusetts. Steve obtained a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from the University of Massachusetts and a Juris Doctor from the University of Miami School of Law. Steve began his legal career as a law clerk for the Honorable James R. Jorgenson at the Third District Court of Appeal in Miami, Florida.

Steve then began his legal practice in Coconut Grove, Florida. There he worked in the areas of personal injury defense, first party coverage litigation, as well as handling appeals.

Steve then opened the Ft. Myers office for a prominent Miami firm. There his practice included personal injury insurance defense, first party insurance litigation, matters involving property and casualty insurance, as well as a wide variety of other tort, insurance litigation and appellate law. Steve has successfully brought and defended appeals in several District Courts of Appeal, as well as in the Florida Supreme Court.

Steve joined the Ft. Myers office of Vernis & Bowling of Southwest Florida nearly 20 years ago. He is the managing attorney, and continues to practice in the areas of property and casualty insurance, automobile liability, premises liability, construction and construction defect litigation, and first party coverage. He represents insurance companies, insureds and self-insureds in trial and appellate litigation. Steve has represented clients in successful jury trials in Lee, Collier, Charlotte, Sarasota and Manatee counties.

Steven Sundook is a member of the Florida Bar, Federal District Courts for the Southern and Middle Districts of Florida, American Bar Association, Florida Supreme Court Local Rules Committee, Lee County Bar Association, Southwest Florida Claims Association. He is also an associate member of the South Florida Public Risk Management Association. Steven has been a member of The American Inns of Court for over 10 years, and is currently a “Master” level member. The American Inns of Court is an association of lawyers, judges, and other legal professionals from all levels and backgrounds who share a passion for professional excellence.

In his free time, Steve enjoys biking, hiking, cooking and traveling with his wife and two daughters. He is an avid Miami Hurricanes football fan and was born into being a Boston Red Sox fan. He continues to ride the sox rollercoaster of suffering and thrills all summer long.

Footer