Sarah Goldberg, of the Miami office, obtained a summary judgment in an insurance carrier’s favor, following 14 months of the Plaintiff delaying the case and aggressive discovery and Motion Practice on Sarah’s part. Plaintiff was seeking replacement of a roof and the full interior of both the main house and detached efficiency of the property. Plaintiff’s counsel continually refused to respond to discovery, failed to have their witnesses appear for depositions and continually requested continuances on Sarah’s motion for summary judgment hearing. Sarah convinced the Court to strike the Plaintiff’s first expert after he refused to appear for deposition and was successful in having the court strike the Plaintiff’s second expert due to untimely disclosure. Sarah then convinced the court not only to deny the continuance of the hearing on the Motion for Summary Judgment once again, but to grant the motion in Sarah’s client’s favor. Plaintiff then moved for rehearing claiming “excusable neglect” for untimely disclosure of the second expert. The Court denied Plaintiff’s motion for rehearing based on Sarah’s written memorandum which set forth in detail Plaintiff’s numerous discovery violations in the case, showing willful failure to prosecute, not “excusable neglect.”