Mr. Davis practices primarily in the area of business-related litigation including condominium and homeowner association litigation, bankruptcy, foreclosures, collections, partnership disputes, as well as intellectual property law. He has chaired numerous cases before judges, juries, and appellate panels. Mr. Davis has also gained considerable expertise in timeshare litigation. Prior to law school he spent several years at IBM Corporation as a computer programmer and is often called upon for his technical expertise in technology-related matters. Combining his technical expertise with his legal skills has proved to be invaluable when serving as an expert witness on attorney’s fees. Mr. Davis has qualified and testified in state court and federal court as an attorney’s fee expert.
Mr. Davis is an Adjunct Professor at Florida International University. He has been named top “Up and Comer” in South Florida 2003 and 2004 in the South Florida Legal Guide.
- Balaguer v. Physicians for the Hand (2016): Appeal from the final judgement confirming an arbitration award in favor of Physicians for the Hand (“Physicians”) and denying Balaguer’s petition to vacate award. The court affirms because (1) Ouellette orally assigned her rights to Physicians for any interest in payments under the agreement, and (2) there was no evidence that the arbitrator exceeded her powers by going beyond her authority granted by the parties. Balaguer ordered to pay.
- Tahiti Beach v. Pfeffer (2011): Appeal from partial final summary judgement in favor of Pfeffer. The issue is whether the imposition of fines by the homeowner’s association complied with the requirements of section 720.305(2). The court ruled that the imposed fine far exceeding the $100 per day permitted by statute, did not meet the requirements, and that this issue is procedural and remedial in nature, therefore there is not a constitutional issue.
- Desert Palace v. Kaye (1997): Appellant (Desert Palace) sought to enforce judgment, obtained in Nevada, in Florida.The court ruled that Florida courts are obligated by Full Faith and Credit clause to recognize judgments which have been validly rendered in the courts of sister states, despite the judgment being based on a gambling debt.