The law firm represents individuals and entities in automobile litigation, construction litigation, intentional torts, personal injury, and wrongful death, personal injury protection insurance, premises liability, products liability, and subrogation. The law firm is committed to a traditional work ethic, personal service, and professionalism. The clients are provided assertive, consistent representation from the commencement of representation through conclusion of the legal matter. The law firm is supported by experienced legal staff.

Fred L Fulmer


Fred has tried over 150 cases to jury verdict throughout the State of Florida from Jacksonville, Daytona, Orlando, Tampa/St. Pete, West Palm Beach, Ft. Lauderdale, Miami, and Key West.


Automobile litigation, premises liability, construction litigation, personal injury, and wrongful death, personal injury protection insurance, products liability, and subrogation.


The Law Offices of Fred Land Fulmer, P.A. is a law firm offering legal services to insurance companies, self-insured entities, business and individuals throughout Florida.






Fred Fulmer earned his undergraduate degree of Bachelor of Science in Industrial Management from Purdue University, and his Juris Doctorate degree from Nova Southeastern University Center for the Study of Law.

He has tried over 150 cases in all types of civil litigation involving bodily injury, wrongful death, property damage and construction defects to jury verdict throughout the State of Florida from Jacksonville, Daytona, Orlando, Tampa/St. Pete, West Palm Beach, Ft. Lauderdale, Miami, and Key West.


Recent Case Summaries

“I was retained by an insurance company to defend a professional restoration company for negligent cleaning of the hotel and adjoining apartment building in a construction defect case. Plaintiff alleged my client was negligent in the cleaning and restoration of the common area and hallway carpets of the twelve floor hotel and adjoining apartment building. Plaintiff alleged the cleaning process caused the carpet to become stained necessitating the replacement of the carpet in both buildings. Through discovery, I was able to ascertain the stains in the carpet not as a result of my client’s cleaning and restoration process, but as a result of construction paint utilized on the interior walls that seeped into the carpet. Plaintiff’s claim for damages was in excess of $300,000.00. Through persistence and persuasion, I convinced the plaintiff my client was not negligent. Plaintiff agreed to dismiss with prejudice the lawsuit against my client without a monetary

Fred L. Fulmer

“ I was retained by a self-insured to represent them in a trip and fall incident by a security guard in the gatehouse to my client’s apartment complex. Plaintiff alleged he was working as a security guard for a third-party security company hired by my client to provide security services. Plaintiff alleged he trip and fell on torn and dilapidated carpet within the gatehouse. Plaintiff alleged defendant was negligent in failing to maintain the carpet in a safe condition. Plaintiff sustained a fractured distal tibia necessitating the implantation of an orthopedic plate and screws. The injury was significant and resulted a in large economic damage claim.

In the defense of the case, I argued a non-party defendant, plaintiff’s employer, the security company, was negligent in failing to provide a safe workplace for the plaintiff. The security company performed inspections of the gatehouse multiple times each week, noted the alleged unsafe condition in their reports, but never took action to remedy the dangerous condition. The security company was listed as a non-party defendant on the verdict form.

The jury found the non-party security company 85% negligent and my client only 15% negligent. My client served a proposal for settlement upon plaintiff. Defendant’s proposal for settlement was greater than the net judgment to plaintiff resulting in an award to defendant for attorney’s fees and costs in defending the lawsuit. The award for attorney’s fees and costs to defendant exceeded plaintiff’s judgment against my client, resulting in my client not having to pay any money to plaintiff.”

Fred L. Fulmer

“ I was retained by an insurance company to represent two employees of a restaurant. Plaintiff was a patron in the restaurant who was asked to leave the restaurant because of his actions and demeanor towards other patrons. My two clients, the waiters, escorted the patron to leave the restaurant, but as plaintiff was leaving they pushed plaintiff down the steps to the restaurant entrance striking his head sustaining head (brain) and body injuries. Plaintiff sued my two clients for negligent handling, failure to follow policies and procedures and removal from the restaurant. The incident was captured on video. My clients had their depositions taken prior to them being joined as defendants in the lawsuit. Their testimony was different than what was observable in the video tape of the incident. I stressed to my clients and assured them the jury would have more respect for them if they acknowledged the error in their testimony. As a result of my clients acknowledging their errors, we gained credibility with the jury resulting in the jury disbelieving plaintiff’s alleged injuries. The jury found the restaurant 75% at-fault, each of my two clients 5% at-fault and the plaintiff 15% at-fault. The jury award was nominal and significantly favorable for my clients under the circumstances.”

Fred L. Fulmer