Roberto Servitje-Achutegui v. Gonzalo Fernandez Del Castillo Quintana
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledJuly 29, 2026
Docket3D2024-2156
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed July 29, 2026.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
Nos. 3D24-2155, 3D24-2156 & 3D24-2157
Lower Tribunal No. 18-35375-CA-01
________________
Mauricio Servitje-Labarrere, et al.,
Appellants,
vs.
Gonzalo Fernandez del Castillo Quintana, et al.,
Appellees.
Appeals from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, William
Thomas, Judge.
Lauri Waldman Ross, P.A., and Lauri Waldman Ross; Vernis &
Bowling of Miami, P.A., and Michael Schiffrin, for appellants.
Jones & Adams, P.A., and Matthew L. Jones, Jorge L. Porro, and Eric
S. Rojo-Dotel, for appellees Gonzalo Fernandez del Castillo Quintana and
Jasu Juice, LLC.
Before LOGUE, LINDSEY, and GORDO, JJ.
LOGUE, J.
Appellants, Mauricio Servitje-Labarrere, Roberto Servitje-Achutegui,
and Altex USA Corporation, appeal the final judgment entered in favor of
Appellee, Gonzalo Fernandez del Castillo Quintana, following a jury trial on
Fernandez’s amended counterclaim for tortious interference with a business
relationship. The Appellants also appeal non-final rulings preceding the jury
trial and entry of the final order, including the denial of their motion for
summary judgment on Fernandez’s amended counterclaim for tortious
interference. We affirm.
Appellants’ main argument is that the trial court erred in denying their
pretrial motion for summary judgment on Fernandez’s amended
counterclaim for tortious interference. First, because the predecessor judge’s
order granting Appellants’ motion for summary judgment on Fernandez’s
initial counterclaim for tortious interference remained interlocutory as it was
never rendered into a final judgment and indeed became non-operative
when Fernandez amended his counterclaim for tortious interference, the
successor judge committed no reversible error in re-examining that issue.
Second, Fernandez’s March 26, 2021 declaration in opposition to
summary judgment provided that (1) Southern Gardens Citrus Processing
Corp. informed Fernandez that it was interested in hiring him; (2) Southern
Gardens then received Appellants’ email falsely stating that Fernandez was
2
subject to a non-compete agreement; (3) Appellants also mailed
Fernandez’s attorney a letter threatening him and Southern Gardens with
legal action if Fernandez accepted employment with Southern Gardens; and
(4) thereafter Southern Gardens informed Fernandez that it would only be
interested in hiring him indirectly as a consultant through Jasu Juice, LLC.1
Fernandez’s declaration was sufficient to create an issue of fact as to
whether Appellants’ false email caused Southern Gardens to decline to hire
Fernandez as an employee, even considering the clear and contrary
deposition testimony by Southern Gardens’ representatives. See Perez-
Gurri Corp. v. McLeod, 238 So. 3d 347, 350 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (“[A] motion
for summary judgment is not a trial by affidavit or deposition. Summary
judgment is not intended to weigh and resolve genuine issues of material
fact, but only identify whether such issues exist. If there is disputed evidence
on a material issue of fact, summary judgment must be denied and the issue
submitted to the trier of fact.”). We have reviewed the other issues raised by
the Appellants and find no reversible error.
Affirmed.
1
Fernandez is the Chief Executive Officer of Jasu Juice.
3