Case Background
A Miami-Dade County jury on July 23, 2025, sided with the Defendants in a wrongful death lawsuit. The case, which centered on a fatal traffic accident, had involved Plaintiffs Japhia Exantus, acting as the personal representative of the estate of her deceased mother, Benita Felimond. Ms. Exantus had sued Defendants Jocelyne Timeny and Calebe Homilus, the drivers of the other vehicles involved in the collision. The lawsuit had been filed on August 29, 2022.
Cause
The complaint had alleged that on June 22, 2022, a three-vehicle collision occurred in Miami-Dade County, Florida. The Plaintiffs stated that Ms. Felimond had been driving her vehicle when she had collided with the other two vehicles driven by the Defendants. The Plaintiffs' lawyers had accused Defendant Jocelyne Timeny of negligence. They alleged she had operated her vehicle in a careless and reckless manner, and that she had failed to yield the right-of-way, failed to maintain proper control of her vehicle, and failed to maintain a safe speed. The Plaintiffs had also alleged that Ms. Timeny had failed to take the necessary steps to avoid the collision, which caused her vehicle to collide with Ms. Felimond's car.
Injury
As a result of the crash, the Plaintiffs had alleged that Benita Felimond sustained serious and fatal injuries that led to her death. The complaint had claimed that her death caused Japhia Exantus, as her surviving child, to suffer significant losses. These included the loss of her mother's companionship, instruction, guidance, and support. Ms. Exantus had also claimed that she endured mental pain and suffering as a result of her mother's death.
Damages Sought
In her lawsuit, Japhia Exantus had asked for a jury trial and sought compensation from the Defendants. She requested damages in an amount greater than $30,000 for the loss of her mother. The complaint also included a request for compensation for funeral and burial expenses. The total amount of the award was to be determined by the jury.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
The lawsuit, which commenced on August 29, 2022, had progressed to trial after both sides had filed their respective complaints and answers. The case came down to a question of whether the Defendants' actions were the legal cause of the crash and the subsequent death of Ms. Felimond.
Legal Representation
Plaintiff(s): Japhia Exantus as Personal Representative of the Estate of Benita Felimond.
Counsel for Plaintiff(s): Lawrence J. Bohannon
Experts for Plaintiff(s): Katherine L. Kenerson
Defendant(s): Jocelyne Timeny | Calebe Homilus
Counsel for Defendant(s): James J. McNally
Experts for Defendant(s): Stephen F. Lander
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
The trial had centered on the central question of negligence. The Plaintiffs' legal team had argued that Defendant Timeny's failure to drive carefully was the direct cause of the collision. Meanwhile, the Defendants had raised several arguments against the Plaintiffs' claims.
Plaintiff's Claims
The Plaintiffs' legal team had asserted a claim of negligence against Defendant Jocelyne Timeny. They had also alleged that Defendant Calebe Homilus had been negligent in the operation of his vehicle. The Plaintiffs' lawyers had contended that the negligence of both Ms. Timeny and Mr. Homilus was the direct cause of the collision that led to Benita Felimond's death. They also asserted that Jocelyne Timeny's negligence was a substantial factor in causing harm to Japhia Exantus.
Defendants' Defense
In their answer to the complaint, the Defendants had denied all of the Plaintiffs' allegations. They had stated that they were not negligent in any way and that they had not owed a legal duty to the Plaintiffs. The Defendants’ legal team had also raised several affirmative defenses. One of their arguments was that the Plaintiffs had failed to state a valid cause of action for which relief could be granted. The Defendants also had claimed that the Plaintiff had failed to mitigate their damages after the accident. The defense further contended that the decedent, Benita Felimond, was negligent and that her own carelessness had caused or contributed to the crash. The Defendants also stated that some unknown third parties were negligent and were the legal cause of the crash and that this should reduce the Plaintiffs' recovery in whole or in part.
Jury Verdict
After hearing all the evidence and arguments, the jury had returned a verdict in favor of the Defendant, Jocelyne Timeny.
The jury's found that the Defendant was not negligent meant that she was not legally responsible for the Plaintiffs' damages. As a result, the jury's verdict was for the Defendant. The final judgment will reflect this finding, concluding the case in favor of the Defendant, Jocelyne Timeny.
