Suzanne A. Singer

Practice Details

• Firm Information
  Position

  Partner

  Firm Name

  Rumberger, Kirk & Caldwell Professional Association
• Representative Cases & Transactions
  Cases

  Notable Cases: Robert v. City of Boca Raton et. al: Robert v. City of Boca Raton et. al., Obtained summary judgment in a race discrimination case under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Florida Civil Rights Act
  42 U.S.C 1983 which was affirmed on appeal by the USCA of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit.
  Jonelle Cragg v. Miami Dade College: Obtained a defense verdict for Miami Dade College in a federal lawsuit where Plaintiff alleged unlawful deprivation of her civil rights under both the American with Disabilities Acts
  the Florida Civil Rights Act.
  Russell Svejkovsky v. Palm Beach State College: After a seven day trial, Suzanne Singer
  David Acosta from Rumberger's Miami office obtained a defense verdict for Palm Beach State College. The Plaintiff claimed he was discriminated against because of his race (White)
  was subjected to a hostile work environment. Plaintiff further claimed he was subject to retaliation. After deliberating for approximately an hour, the jury returned a defense verdict on all three counts in favor of Palm Beach State College.
  Lissabet v. Mega Party Events: The plaintiff, a 15 year old girl, allegedly suffered traumatic brain injuries when she fell during a sumo wrestling game at school. The event sponsor, Mega Party, sought discovery of the plaintiff's cell phone to refute the assertion that she could not function normally. The trial court agreed that discovery of the cellular device itself was relevant
  ordered its production, subject to a circumscribed protocol. Plaintiff refused
  sought a writ of certiorari from the Third District Court of Appeal. Plaintiff argued that while certain data stored on the cell phone might be relevant (like photographs), the entire device was not,
  the production invaded the plaintiffs' privacy.
  Mega party argued, among other things, that production of the entire device was powerfully relevant to its defenses, particularly given the allegations of traumatic brain injury. Mega Party argued that, particularly in today's society, adolescent activities can revolve extensively, if not exclusively, around cellular devices. The playing of games, taking of photos, phone calls, social media
  a myriad of other programs
  apps are all instantly
  constantly available. The use of the device as a whole would be essential to the defense, particularly given plaintiff's active usage.
  The Third District Court of Appeal ultimately agreed with Mega Party,
  denied Plaintiff's certiorari petition.
  Llana-Aday v. Miami Dade College: RumbergerKirk attorney Suzanne Singer represented Miami Dade College in a gender discrimination case. Plaintiff alleged the College fired her because of her gender
  another female from the positions of Recruitment
  Retention Specialist. Plaintiff further alleged that once the College realized its actions left it 'vulnerable,' it eliminated all four Recruitment
  Retention positions, occupied by two men
  two women,
  created two new positions of Instruction/Retention
  Transition Specialist. Plaintiff applied for the newly created position but the College refused to hire her because of her gender
  hired two men who were less qualified.
  Ms. Singer argued that the Plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of gender discrimination. Federal Judge James Lawrence King agreed, finding the Plaintiff did not establish a prima facie case of sex plus discrimination because she failed to present similar comparators i.e. subclass of opposite gender (male) who have childcare responsibilities.
  Garayta v. Gathercole
  Dr. Padron: RumbergerKirk attorney Suzanne Singer represented Geoff Gathercole, College Wide Director for Continuing Education
  Professional Development,
  Dr. Eduardo Padron, Miami Dade College President in a First Amendment retaliation claim. The Plaintiff, who was Program Manager for the College's North Campus Adult Education Program, alleged that when she exercised her right to free speech
  complained about the improper use of federal grant money she was fired.
  Ms. Singer filed a motion for final summary judgment arguing that the Plaintiff's purported speech was uttered as part of her job responsibilities
  , thus, was not protected speech under the First Amendment. In other words, the Plaintiff was speaking as a public employee pursuant to her official job duties
  not as a private citizen on a matter of public importance.
  In lieu of filing a response to Ms. Singer's motion for final summary judgment,
  in order to avoid a possible award of fees
  costs, the Plaintiff agreed to dismiss her federal lawsuit with prejudice.
  Arachy v. Broward College: RumbergerKirk attorney Suzanne Singer represented Broward College against a sexual discrimination
  retaliation claim. Plaintiff alleged she was fired from her position as Lead Accounts Payable Specialist because of her decision to end a consensual relationship with a member of management. The only evidence relied upon by the Plaintiff was an electronic journal that she created at or near the time of the events. During deposition, Ms. Singer instructed the Plaintiff to maintain her computer hard drive since a forensic analysis would have revealed exactly when Plaintiff typed each of her journal entries. At her continuation deposition, the Plaintiff testified she destroyed her computer hard-drive.
  Ms. Singer filed a motion to strike the Plaintiff's complaint for spoliation of evidence - based upon her failure to produce
  destruction of Plaintiff's computer hard drive. Circuit Court Judge David Krathen agreed, finding that the Plaintiff had a duty to preserve her computer hard drive, that she intentionally
  willfully destroyed the hard drive which went to the heart of the case,
  that its destruction resulted in severe prejudice to Broward College. Consequently, Judge Krathen dismissed the Plaintiff's complaint with prejudice.
  Mir
  a
  Armas v. Schindler Elevator Co., et. al.: RumbergerKirk attorney Suzanne Singer represented Schindler Elevator in companion lawsuits in which the Plaintiffs alleged that they were both injured when the elevator they were riding unexpectedly dropped at a high rate of speed
  then jerked upward in an uncontrollable manner.
  Ms. Singer filed a motion for final summary judgment
  argued that the elevator was not in the exclusive control or possession of Schindler, that Schindler was never notified of the accident
  , more importantly, the evidence revealed that Schindler regularly serviced
  maintained the elevator
  that there was no notice of any prior dangerous condition. Circuit Court Judge Beatrice Butchko agreed, finding that there was no material issue of fact
  as a matter of law there was no negligence on behalf of Schindler.
  Ferguson v. Burke: Obtained a defense verdict for the insured of a New Engl
  based insurance company in a casualty case.
  Gothelf v. Harmon, Inc.: Obtained a defense verdict in a wrongful discharge/retaliation lawsuit filed pursuant to Florida Statute 440.205 (workers compensation statute) today. After a three-day trial, the jury came back under an hour answering no to (1) plaintiff engaged in a statutory protected activity (2) that an adverse employment action then occurred (3) the adverse employment action was 'casually related' to the protected activity
  
  (4) Plaintiff suffered damages as a proximate or legal result of such adverse employment action. A 'no' to any one of those questions would have been a defense verdict.
  Johnson v. Broward Community College: Defense obtained summary judgment on retaliation counts under Florida Civil Right Act
  42 U.S.C 1983. Discrimination under Florida Civil Rights Act proceeded to trial
  resulted in a no damage verdict for the Plaintiff.
  West et al. v. FMS Management Systems d/b/a IHOP: Obtained defense verdict in a public accommodation discrimination lawsuit.
  Kristen Ruffo v. Board of Trustees of Palm Beach State College: The Plaintiff was terminated as the head coach for the women's basketball team on June 20, 2017. Her lawsuit followed alleging that the College terminated her from her position as head coach because she engaged in statutorily protected expression in violation of the Florida Public Whistleblower Act. The Court disagreed. After litigating the case for close to two years, the Court entered an eight page Order on 11/5/2019 finding the Plaintiff did not engage in statutory protected expression
  failed to demonstrate a causal connection between the protected activity
  her termination. Therefore, the College is entitled to summary judgment as a matter of law. Plaintiff's counsel did not appeal so the Order is final. Defense is moving to tax costs of approximately $8,000.
  Wade K. Semerena, individually
  on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated v. Board of Trustees of Miami-Dade College: The trial Court dismissed the Plaintiffs' complaint with prejudice
  the Third DCA affirmed. The lawsuit arises from a former philosophy professor, Dr. Wade Semerena, who sued his former employer (Miami-Dade College) on behalf of himself
  all those similarly situated
  alleges that the College enrolled him in a group healthcare plan that was inappropriate because he was a Medicare eligible retiree. Dr. Semerena also sued Aetna.