Wasson & Associates regularly represents businesses in domestic and international commercial disputes arising out of contracts, failed transactions, and other business disputes. Some of those cases include Quiet Technology DC-8, Inc. v. Hurel-Dubois UK, Ltd., 326 F.3d 1333 (11th Cir. 2003)(federal claim based on defective design of commercial jet engine features); MCC-Marble Ceramic Center, Inc. v. Ceramica Nuova D’Agostino, S.P.A., 144 F.3d 1384 (11th Cir. 1998)(establishing inapplicability of Parol Evidence Rule to cases brought under Convention of International Sale of Goods); Sundial Towers Condo., Inc. v. Grezell, 100 So. 3d 705 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)(representing condominium association in challenge to sale of condo unit); M. Vila & Assocs., Inv. v. Miami-Dade County, 72 So. 3d 762 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)(representing road construction contractor in claim against governmental entity); A.I.C. Trading Corp. v. Sussman, 40 So. 3d 769 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)(representing commercial landlord in suit involving enforceability of lease option agreement); A-Macke Corp. v. Galaxy Ventures, LLC, 32 So. 3d 627 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)(appeal by seller of commercial real estate from judgment of specific performance of sales contract); Amoco Oil Co. v. Gomez, 379 F.3d 1266 (11th Cir. 2004)(representing franchisee in contractual dispute with major oil company); Comptech Int’l, Inc. v. Milam, 753 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 1999)(representing amicus curiae in appeal involving applicability of economic loss rule to statutory causes of action); Barbara Creative Jewelry, Inc. v. Universal Security Alarm System, 132 So. 3d 262 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)(representing business owner theft victim in claim against alarm company); Little Bridge Marina, Inc.v. Jones Boat Yard, Inc., 770 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)(representing yacht owner in defense of claim by vessel repair facility), and Nguyen v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A., 709 F.3d 1342 (11th Cir. 2013)(representing depositor in action against national bank arising out of closure of Saigon branch when North Vietnamese Army invaded South Vietnam).

Wasson & Associates’ diverse practice includes representing individuals and business entities in civil litigation and appeals involving denial of civil rights, claims of defamation, and other tort cases involving personal injury. A brief sampling of the variety of such cases includes AFL-CIO v. City of Miami, 637 F.3d 1178 (11th Cir. 2011)(representing labor organization and individuals in civil rights action against City of Miami and police arising out of protest demonstration); Patry v. Capps, 633 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1994)(reversing dismissal of medical malpractice action based upon method compliance with notice of intent statute); Wapnick v. Veteran’s Council of Indian River County, Inc., 123 So. 3d 622 (Fla. 4th DCA 20130)(representing plaintiff in appeal from award of sanctions in case involving claims of defamation and invasion of privacy); Smyth v. Infrastructure Corp. of America, 113 So. 3d 904 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)(reversing summary judgment for defendants in wrongful death action); LRX, Inc. v. Horizon Assoc. Joint Venture, 922 So. 2d 984 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)(representing successful claimant in action for libel, slander and tortious interference in business relationships); Mount v. Camelot Care Center of Dade, Inc., 816 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)(case involving violation of Assisted Living Facility Resident Bill of Rights and wrongful death claims); Figgie Int’l v. Alderman, 698 So. 2d 563 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)(product liability action involving destruction of evidence documenting product defects leading to permanent paralysis of plaintiff).

The firm’s class action cases include Shoma Development Corp. v. Vazquez, 749 So. 2d 1287 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)(property owners with misrepresentation claims against developer); Cano v. WHM, LLC, 4D13-4726 (Fla. 4th DCA) (employees seeking recovery under minimum wage laws); In Re Southern Florida Waste Disposal Antitrust Litigation, 896 F.2d 493 (11th Cir. 1990)(class of business owners against waste companies fixing prices); 31 Foster Children v. Bush, 329 F.3d 1255(11th Cir. 2003)(class of abused foster children denied necessary services).

In addition to representing clients in civil matters, Wasson & Associates also handles criminal appeals and post-conviction proceedings ranging from DUI cases to death penalty appeals. Some of the more notable criminal cases we have handled are Lebron v. State, 232 So. 3d 942 (Fla. 2017)(reversing death sentence in capital murder appeal); Hernandez v. State, 278 So. 3d 345 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)(reversing for resentencing in attempted murder case based on ineffective assistance of trial counsel); United States v. Pickett, 602 F. App’x 774 (11th Cir. 2015)(appealing child pornography conviction); Lugo v. State 2 So. 3d 1 (Fla. 2008)(representing death row inmate in post-conviction proceeding involving claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel); Thompson v. State, 695 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 1997)(reversing conviction of defendant for attempted murder of law enforcement officer); Delgado v. State, 776 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 2000)(reversing first degree murder conviction); Reynolds v. State, 983 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)(reversing conviction for trafficking in marijuana); Page v. State, 980 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)(representing city commissioner in appeal from conviction for bribery by public official and receiving unlawful compensation); Hernandez v. State, 959 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)(representing owner of vehicle convicted of manslaughter by culpable negligence); United States v. Armstrong, 19 F.3d 1445 (11th Cir. 1994)(representing alleged co-conspirator in cocaine smuggling operation).

We have represented both ERISA plan administrators and plan beneficiaries in federal cases involving retirement benefits and health benefits under employer-based benefit plans including Schwade v. Total Plastics, 496 F. App’x. 6 (11th Cir. 2012); Johnson Controls, Inc. v. Flaherty, 408 F. App’x 312 (11th Cir. 2011)(contesting Plan’s reimbursement provision); Sziranyi v. Allan R. Dunn, M.D., P.A., 383 F. App’x 884 (11th Cir. 2010)(contesting penalty imposed on plan administrator).

The firm represents many businesses and individuals in disputes against insurance companies including Aleman v. Ace American Ins. Co., 564 F. App’x 1016 (11th Cir. 2014)(priority of policies under car rental agreement); Rissman, Barrett, Hurt, Donahue & McClain, P.A. v. Westport Ins. Corp., 477 F. App’x 639 (11th Cir. 2012)(contesting denial of claim under professional services coverage); Wellington Specialty Ins. Co. v. Kendall Crane Svc., 434 F. App’x 794 (11th Cir. 2011)(denial of liability coverage to construction subcontractor); Macola v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 483 F.3d 1229) (11th Cir. 2007); Stillman v. Travelers Ins. Co., 88 F.3d 911 (11th Cir. 1996)(denial of coverage to building owner under pollution exclusion clause).

Wasson & Associates represents commercial clients in matters of international trade and business disputes in cases including Quiet Technology DC-8, Inc. v. Hurel-Dubois UK, Ltd., 326 F.3d 1333 (11th Cir. 2003)(claim based on defective design of jet engine features); MCC-Marble Ceramic Center, Inc. v. Ceramica Nuova D’Agostino, S.P.A., 144 F.3d 1384 (11th Cir. 1998)(establishing inapplicability of Parol Evidence Rule to cases brought under Convention of International Sale of Goods).

Wasson & Associates represents seamen and passengers in admiralty injury claims, and business interests in other types of maritime cases including Groves v. Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd., 463 F. App’x 837 (11th Cir. 2012)(passenger injury claim); Odyssey Marine Exploration, Inc. v. Bray, 636 F.3d 1338 (11th Cir. 2011)(suit against treasure salvor on contractual claim); Folino v. Procelli, 516 Fed. Appx. 845 (11th Cir. 2013)(injury claim involving application of Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collision at Sea); Royal Caribbean Cruises, Ltd. v. Sinclair, 808 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)(case involving question of applicability of medical malpractice presuit requirements to maritime injury claim).

The firm’s founder, Roy D. Wasson, commenced his practice at a law firm representing many product manufacturers in cases involving strict product liability claims. Mr. Wasson in his prior firm represented British, Japanese, and American automobile manufacturers in crashworthiness cases and other defective product litigation. He defended a Fortune 500 company against claims arising from Plaintiffs’ alleged exposure to toxic chemicals, defended aircraft component part manufacturers in aviation litigation, and litigated product liability cases involving claims of unwholesome food products. After forming Wasson & Associates, Mr. Wasson brought his experience in defending product manufacturers to cases representing injured persons in cases including Ojeda v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 3D12-2624 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)(representing estate of deceased smoker against tobacco company); Ford Motor Co. v. Stimpson, 115 So. 3d 401 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)(representing injured motorist in sudden acceleration case); Oliva v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co., No. 1D11-3389 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)(representing invalid smoker in case against tobacco company); Tri-Cam Industries v. Coba, 100 So. 3d 105 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)(representing estate of decedent killed in fall from defective ladder); Figgie Int’l. v. Alderman, 698 So. 2d 563 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)(suit against scaffold manufacturer resulting in 8-figure settlement in favor of quadriplegic plaintiff following exposure of manufacturer’s destruction and concealment of evidence).

Wasson & Associates represents business entities and professionals in litigation before federal and state agencies and the courts in administrative regulatory matters. Examples of typical cases include Spiral Tech Elementary Charter School v. School Board of Miami-Dade County, 994 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)(appeal from school board’s decision to terminate charter school’s charter); Gonzalez v. Dept. of Bus. & Prof. Reg., 958 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)(representing air conditioning contractor in appeal from revocation of professional license); Criminal Justice Stds. & Training Comm’n v. Latorre (successfully defending certified police officer in decertification proceedings); Saban v. United States Attorney General, 566 Fed. Appx. 793 (11th Cir. 2014)(petition for review of decision of board of immigration appeals); The Florida Bar v. Bitterman, 33 So. 3d 686 (Fla. 2010)(representing attorney in bar disciplinary proceedings); Alfonso v. Dept. of Environmental Regulation; 616 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 1993)(representing property owner in water rights claim); Johnston v. City of Hallandale Beach, 914 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)(representing building inspector in whistleblower case).