timulating" material at issue is relevant to the "deviant behavior pattern." We therefore approve the Second District's decision in Taylor and quash the Third District's decision in Kasischke. We remand this case to the district court with instructions that it be returned to the trial court for further proceedings c

despite having been joined at the hip with Epstein's claim against Rothstein since 2009— the risk of inconsistent verdicts is real. Instructive, is the Third District's opinion in Travelers Express Inc. v. Acosta, 397 So. 2d 733 (1981), in which the court considered whether a plaintiff's malicious prosecution claim

the course of litigation. This opinion reflects a direct conflict between the interpretation of the scope of the litigation privilege reflected in the Third District's Wolfe decision and the Fourth District's repeated and consistent recognition of the continued viability of the tort of malicious prosecution in th

ious prosecution or abuse of process. The court certified conflict with Wolfe; the Florida Supreme Court ultimately approved Fischer and disapproved the Third District's decision in Wolfe. In its Opinion in this case, the Fourth District held that its decision in Fischer controlled as to the litigation privilege is