Opinion

Jesse Bunnell, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Brianna M. Brown v. WAR Network, LLC, Etc.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Filed
Apr 8, 2026
Status
Published
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 40.1%

The opinion

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JESSE BUNNELL, as personal representative of the

ESTATE OF BRIANNA M. BROWN, deceased,

Petitioner,

v.

WAR NETWORK, LLC, A Florida Limited Company d/b/a

WE ARE RECOVERY; and SECOND CHANCE DETOX, LLC, a Florida

Limited Liability Company d/b/a COMPASS DETOX,

Respondents.

No. 4D2025-2431

[April 8, 2026]

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth

Judicial Circuit, Broward County; William W. Haury, Jr., L.T. Case Nos.

062022CA014229AXXXCE; 062025CA004844AXXXCE.

Aaron M. Clemens of Romano Law Group, West Palm Beach, for

petitioner.

Philip Louis Reizenstein of Reizenstein & Associates, P.A., Miami, and

Lawrence R. Plunkett, Jr. of Reich, Album & Plunkett, L.L.C., Mandeville,

Louisiana, pro hac vice, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

Jesse Bunnell, as personal representative for the estate of Brianna M.

Brown, petitions for a writ of certiorari to quash an order denying

consolidation of two circuit court actions arising from Brianna Brown’s

death and a motion to stay proceedings in the earlier-filed action. Bunnell

argues that certiorari relief is warranted because the primary and related

cases arise from the same nucleus of operative facts and evidence, and

separate trials pose the inherent risk of producing inconsistent and

repugnant verdicts. We grant the petition and quash the circuit court’s

orders consolidating the cases and imposing a stay.

In the first case, the decedent’s husband and three surviving children

alleged that in 2020 the decedent attended Second Chance Detox, LLC,

d/b/a Compass Detox as an inpatient, WAR Networks, LLC, d/b/a We Are

Recovery as an intensive outpatient, and lived in Oasis, a residential

substance abuse recovery facility to treat substance abuse issues. Both

Second Chance and War Networks were purchased by Tamara Markovich.

In 2021, the decedent suffered a fatal overdose. The following year, her

husband and children filed a complaint alleging wrongful death against

WAR; wrongful death damages for breach of fiduciary duties against WAR;

wrongful death against Second Chance; wrongful death damages for

breach of fiduciary duty against Second Chance; wrongful death against

Markovich; and wrongful death damages for breach of fiduciary duty

against Markovich. The complaint was subsequently amended, and the

trial was set for August 2025.

In the second case, her husband and children filed a complaint against

Drew Lieberman, M.D., Richard Waserstein, and Ness Group, LLC alleging

civil Florida RICO (Racketeering Influence and Corruption Organization)

Act claim for declaratory judgment against Lieberman; civil RICO claim

against Waserstein for declaratory judgment; civil RICO claim for

declaratory judgment against Ness Group; civil remedies for criminal

practices claim against Lieberman, Waserstein, and Ness Group; civil

remedies for criminal practices claim against Waserstein; and civil

remedies for criminal practices claim against Ness Group. The second

case was set for trial in August 2026.

The parties in the first case jointly moved to consolidate both cases on

the grounds that doing so would promote the efficient administration of

justice, conserve judicial resources, avoid inconsistent results, prevent

multiple court appearances, and prevent repugnant or inconsistent

verdicts. Lieberman opposed consolidation, and the motion was denied.

“[W]here the denial of a party’s motion to consolidate two actions could

cause repugnant and inconsistent verdicts, such denial is a departure

from the essential requirements of the law, because it could cause material

injury that cannot be remedied on appeal.” Tracey v. Swanholm Cent.,

LLC, 223 So. 3d 448, 450 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (citing Tommie v. LaChance,

412 So. 2d 439, 441 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)). That is the case here. So we

grant the petition and quash the circuit court’s order denying

consolidation of the two related cases.

Petition granted.

KUNTZ, C.J., CONNER and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.

* * *

2

Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.

3

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.