Atty. Ryan D. Burns
Ryan is a longstanding member of the firm's Casualty Department and has considerable experience with a wide variety of casualty matters. A substantial portion of Ryan’s practice is devoted to the handling of matters with complex theories of liability, often involving catastrophic loss and/or wrongful death.
Automobile Liability & More Attorney · Serving Fort Lauderdale, FL · 20+ Years Experience
Profile Summary
About Ryan D. Burns at a Glance
Ryan D. Burns is a Shareholder based in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, practicing at Marshall Dennehey. They have 20+ years of legal experience, licensed to practice since 2006. Their practice focuses on personal injury, product liability, construction, litigation, and consumer. Admitted to practice in Florida (2006), U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (2008), and U.S. District Court Middle District of Florida (2019). Educated at Indiana University Maurer School of Law (J.D., 2006) and University of Florida (B.S., 2003). Active member of American Bar Association. Serves clients in Fort Lauderdale, FL and the surrounding metropolitan area.
Get Legal Help from Ryan D. Burns in Fort Lauderdale
Sign up free and choose one of the two methods below.
Have a legal question? Sign up free, submit it through the Ask the Attorney module and receive a focused answer from a specialist.
- Free to ask a question
- Answers from specialist attorneys
- Optional private / anonymous question
Request an online video meeting or an in-person consultation at the attorney's office. Pick a time that works for you and share the details securely.
- Online video meeting
- In-person at the attorney's office
- Secure messaging and payment
About Ryan D. Burns
- Ryan is a longstanding member of the firm's Casualty Department and has considerable experience with a wide variety of casualty matters
- A substantial portion of Ryan’s practice is devoted to the handling of matters with complex theories of liability, often involving catastrophic loss and/or wrongful death
- They include claims emanating from product liability, construction and equipment accidents, automotive liability, interstate trucking and transportation, negligent security, premises and retail liability, among many others
- As an example of this complexity, Ryan has litigated several matters where causation for death was at issue such as alleged complications from surgeries and alleged food borne illnesses (e. coli, vibrio), and has handled numerous multi-party claims involving demands in excess of $50 million
- As a litigator with experience in a multitude of casualty disciplines from the general to the specialized, including asbestos and toxic tort, maritime and fraud/special investigation, Ryan serves as thought leader and mentor to associates in his office
- He has also argued appeals before the Second, Third, and Fourth District Courts of Appeal
- Ryan's legal career started as a prosecutor with Miami-Dade State Attorney's Office, which provided him with considerable litigation experience and familiarity with the criminal justice system
- This was a continuation of his focus on litigation during his legal education at Indiana University School of Law - Bloomington where he was in Moot Court (finalist and competition team) and the school's trial competition team
- In combination with his civil career at Marshall Dennehey, Ryan has tried approximately 20 jury trials to verdict, including several complex multi-party and Wrongful Death matters spanning weeks in court
- Ryan is a Florida native, born and raised in Cocoa Beach in Brevard County and attending the University of Florida as an undergraduate where he studied theoretical physics and mathematics before leaving Florida for law school with his wife
- He now is based out of Fort Lauderdale where he and his wife are raising two daughters, and in his spare time trains for obstacle course racing and triathlons
- Honors & Awards •Florida Super Lawyers Rising Star (2013-2020) Classes/Seminars Taught •Negligent Security Claims - Premises Under Attack, Marshall Dennehey Client Seminar, July 25, 2025 •Relevant Procedural Rule Changes for Risk Manager, Broward County RIMS Chapter Meeting, Ft
- Lauderdale, FL, January 15, 2025 •New Florida Tort Reform Changes Under HB 837, Tampa Bay RIMS Chapter Meeting, Tampa, FL, October 18, 2023 •56 Feds are Coming: Strategies Using the Upcoming Florida Summary Judgment Standard, Marshall Dennehey Client Webinar, January 15, 2021 •When Lithium Batteries Fail and What to do About it - panel, 2019 CLM Southeast Conference, Orlando, FL, October, 2019 •ETHICS: The Tripartite Relationship and Bad Faith Claims, Marshall Dennehey Florida Claims Symposium - Casino Royale, Tampa, FL, September 20, 2018 •Discussions of Recent Florida Case law Developments Regarding EUO Methodology and Limitations, FIFEC - Florida Insurance Fraud Education Committee, Orlando, FL, June 2012 •Florida Premises Liability Law and the Affect of Medicare Liens on Settlements, client seminar, October 2011 Published Works •'Understanding Florida's Sweeping New Immunity Law for COVID-19 Claims,' Insurance Journal, April 15, 2021 •'Commentary: Navigating Florida's Comparative Fault Statute,' Insurance Journal, April 20, 2016 •'Board of Contributors: Florida Supreme Court Sets Settlement Ground Rules,' Daily Business Review, April 23, 2015 •'GEICO Case Opens Door to Depose Plaintiff's Physician,' Daily Business Review, April 1, 2013 Legal Teaching Position •Certified Instructor in Adjuster Law and Policy by the Florida Department of Financial Services, Bureau of Licensing Results Summary Judgment Secured in a Foodborne Illness Wrongful Death Matter We won summary judgment in a foodborne illness wrongful death case
- The plaintiff filed a wrongful death action against multiple parties, including the seafood supplier, distributors, transporters and the restaurant that served the decedent
- The plaintiff alleged the decedent died as a result of eating raw oysters that contained vibrio vulnificus
- We represented the supplier and argued there was no evidence the oysters were defective when they left the supplier’s hands
- An expert was retained to support our motion for summary judgment
- The expert prepared an affidavit citing the applicable duties pertaining to the harvesting, processing, and transportation of the oysters and stated the supplier did not breach any of the applicable duties
- Utilizing calculated pressure tactics in a long-term strategy execution, plaintiff’s counsel eventually conceded that the record evidence did not support a finding that the supplier breached its duties, resulting in the court granting summary judgment
- The case remains ongoing with multimillion dollar demands against the remaining defendants
- Appellate Success in Wrongful Death Product Liability Action Our attorneys succeeded in obtaining an affirmance in the Fifth District Court of Appeal of a final dismissal order of a wrongful death product liability action
- The decedent’s estate filed the lawsuit two years after the statute of limitations expired
- The estate argued the statute was tolled for a variety of reasons
- The trial court dismissed the case, with prejudice, after giving the Estate five attempts to amend
- The Fifth District affirmed the dismissal and dispensed with oral argument that same day
- Thought Leadership Legal Updates for Insurance Services Policies Alone Fall Short: Establishing a Standard of Care and Duty Requires More Than Internal Procedures December 13, 2023 A recent decision by the Florida Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal confirmed the application of rarely considered case law that analyzes the application of a company’s internal policies and procedures to the standard of care in its industry.In Discount Tire Co. v
- Tammy Bradford, 2023 WL 7228186 (Fla. 5th DCA 2023), the appellee alleged negligence by the employees of the appellant for allowing tires greater than 10 years old to be placed back on a vehicle
- Ultimately, the tires failed and caused the death of Bradford’s husband and minor child.At the trial court, both sides presented experts, but neither opined to a violated industry standard, authoritative regulation or statute that would have applied to the tire repair industry
- Instead, Bradford argued that Discount violated its own policies and procedures, as the subject tires, provided by Bradford, were older than the internal policies and procedures permitted.After Bradford rested at trial, Discount successfully moved for directed verdict based upon Bradford’s failure to establish a duty
- After appropriate motions, the trial court reversed itself and granted a new trial based on “this Court's reading of Moyer v
- Reynolds, 780 So. 2d 205, 208 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) and its acceptance of [Bradford’s] argument that Moyer stands for the proposition that evidence a defendant failed to comply with its own internal rule or procedure is evidence of the standard of care and evidence of a breach of the standard of care.”The critical factor as determined by the appellate court was the trial court’s improper reliance on Moyer v
- Reynolds, 780 So.2d 205 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Bradford argued at trial that Moyer held an organization’s internal policies establish a legal duty owed to a plaintiff
- Moreover, a breach of internal policy establishes a case that must be determined by the jury.However the Fifth District Court of Appeal disagreed and held that established case law supported the position that an organization's policy could not alone establish a standard of care for the applicable industry.Moyer, a wrongful death action based on medical malpractice, concerned the trial court's exclusion of portions of a doctor's testimony regarding internal policy procedures of a hospital. 780 So. 2d at 206
- Critically, Moyer stated that although this testimony was admissible as some evidence of the standard of care, “this type of evidence does not conclusively establish the standard of care.” Id.In support of this holding, the Fifth District Court of Appeal cited multiple industry diverse cases: Wal Mart Stores, Inc. v
- Wittke, 202 So. 3d 929, 930 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) “[A] party’s internal rule does not itself fix the legal standard of care in a negligence action”
- Dominguez v
- Publix Super Markets, Inc., 187 So. 3d 892 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) “[I]nternal safety polices do no themselves establish the standard of care owed to the plaintiff.”
- Gunlock v
- Gill Hotels Co., 622 So. 2d 163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), where the court held that the existence of an internal policy does not create a substantive duty
- De La Torre v
- Flanigan's Enterprises, Inc., 187 So. 3d 330, 334 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) holding “there is ample case law stating that internal policies do not create a duty to third parties.”
- and Warren ex rel
- Brassell v
- K-Mart Corp., 765 So. 2d 235, 236-37 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) where the court held that despite the violation of K-Mart’s internal policy, “[t]he standard of care is set by the community, rather than by a corporation’s internal policy.” Discount Tire violated its own policies and procedures
- However, that violation does not establish a standard of care for the industry
- Therefore the order of a new trial was improper and the trial court’s prior order for directed verdict and final judgment in Discount Tire’s favor was properly reinstated
- Defense Digest Policies Alone Fall Short: Establishing a Standard of Care and Duty Requires More Than Internal Procedures December 1, 2023 Key Points:A defendant’s violation of its own policies and procedures does not establish a standard of care for the industry
- The order of a new trial was improper and the trial court’s prior order for directed verdict and final judgment in the defendant’s favor was properly reinstated
- A recent decision by the Florida Fifth Circuit Court of Appeal confirmed the application of rarely considered case law that analyzes the application of a company’s internal policies and procedures to the standard of care in its industry.In Discount Tire Co. v
- Tammy Bradford, 2023 WL 7228186 (Fla. 5th DCA 2023), the appellee alleged negligence by the employees of the appellant for allowing tires greater than 10 years old to be placed back on a vehicle
- Ultimately, the tires failed and caused the death of Bradford’s husband and minor child.At the trial court, both sides presented experts, but neither opined to a violated industry standard, authoritative regulation, or statute that would have applied to the tire repair industry
- Instead, Bradford argued that Discount Tire violated its own policies and procedures as the subject tires, provided by Bradford, were older than the internal policies and procedures permitted.After Bradford rested at trial, Discount Tire successfully moved for directed verdict based upon Bradford’s failure to establish a duty
- After appropriate motions, the trial court reversed itself and granted a new trial based on “this Court's reading of Moyer v
- Reynolds, 780 So.2d 205, 208 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) and its acceptance of [Bradford’s] argument that Moyer stands for the proposition that evidence a defendant failed to comply with its own internal rule or procedure is evidence of the standard of care and evidence of a breach of the standard of care.”The critical factor as determined by the appellate court was the trial court’s improper reliance on Moyer v
- Reynolds, 780 So.2d 205 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Bradford argued at trial that Moyer held an organization’s internal policies establish a legal duty owed to a plaintiff
- Moreover, a breach of internal policy establishes a case that must be determined by the jury.However, the Fifth District Court of Appeal disagreed and held that established case law supports the position that an organization's policy could not alone establish a standard of care for the applicable industry.Moyer, a wrongful death action based on medical malpractice, concerned the trial court's exclusion of portions of a doctor's testimony regarding internal policy procedures of a hospital. 780 So.2d at 206
- Critically, Moyer stated that, although this testimony was admissible as some evidence of the standard of care, “this type of evidence does not conclusively establish the standard of care.” Id.In support of this holding, the Fifth District Court of Appeal cited multiple industry diverse cases:Wal Mart Stores, Inc. v
- Wittke, 202 So. 3d 929, 930 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) “[A] party’s internal rule does not itself fix the legal standard of care in a negligence action”
- Dominguez v
- Publix Super Markets, Inc., 187 So. 3d 892 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) “[I]nternal safety polices do no themselves establish the standard of care owed to the plaintiff.”
- Gunlock v
- Gill Hotels Co., 622 So. 2d 163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), where the court held that the existence of an internal policy does not create a substantive duty
- De La Torre v
- Flanigan's Enterprises, Inc., 187 So. 3d 330, 334 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) holding “there is ample case law stating that internal policies do not create a duty to third parties.”
- and Warren ex rel
- Brassell v
- K-Mart Corp., 765 So. 2d 235, 236-37 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) where the court held that despite the violation of K-Mart’s internal policy, “[t]he standard of care is set by the community, rather than by a corporation’s internal policy.” Discount Tire violated its own policies and procedures
- However, that violation does not establish a standard of care for the industry
- Therefore, the order of a new trial was improper and the trial court’s prior order for directed verdict and final judgment in Discount Tire’s favor was properly reinstated. *Ryan is a shareholder in our Fort Lauderdale, Florida, office, where he defends claims made and suits brought against insureds and businesses across a number of industries
- Defense Digest, Vol. 29, No. 4, December 2023, is prepared by Marshall Dennehey to provide information on recent legal developments of interest to our readers
- This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship
- ATTORNEY ADVERTISING pursuant to New York RPC 7.1. 2023 Marshall Dennehey
- All Rights Reserved
- This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm
- For reprints, contact [email protected]
Practice Areas Explained
Ryan D. Burns's Areas of Legal Practice
Each practice area below reflects the types of cases Ryan D. Burns handles, with a practical overview of what that area of law involves and how it may apply to your situation in Fort Lauderdale.
Personal Injury in Fort Lauderdale
Personal injury attorneys help accident victims recover compensation for medical bills, lost wages, and pain & suffering. Most work on contingency — no fee unless you win.
Ryan D. Burns is one of 262,557 personal injury attorneys indexed nationally. Browse personal injury attorneys in Florida →
Product Liability in Fort Lauderdale
Ryan D. Burns is one of 65,610 product liability attorneys indexed nationally. Browse product liability attorneys in Florida →
Construction Accidents in Fort Lauderdale
Ryan D. Burns is one of 4,052 construction attorneys indexed nationally. Browse construction attorneys in Florida →
Civil Litigation in Fort Lauderdale
Civil litigation attorneys for breach of contract, business disputes, civil rights, and class action lawsuits.
Ryan D. Burns is one of 450,750 litigation attorneys indexed nationally. Browse litigation attorneys in Florida →
Consumer Protection in Fort Lauderdale
Consumer protection attorneys for fraud, lemon law, debt harassment, and deceptive trade practices.
Ryan D. Burns is one of 50,226 consumer attorneys indexed nationally. Browse consumer attorneys in Florida →
Jurisdictional Context
Why Local Counsel Matters in Fort Lauderdale
Practicing law in Florida. Legal matters in Florida are governed by state-specific rules of civil and criminal procedure, statutes of limitations, and substantive law. Cases originating in Fort Lauderdale are typically filed in the local municipal court or the appropriate Florida state district court, depending on subject matter and amount in controversy. An attorney licensed in Florida brings working knowledge of local procedural deadlines, judicial practices in this venue, and the substantive law that applies to cases brought here. Out-of-state attorneys generally cannot represent clients in Florida courts without local counsel or pro hac vice admission.
Fort Lauderdale Courts and Legal Process
Choosing a Fort Lauderdale-based attorney means your counsel already knows the local docketing timelines, preferred filing formats, and how individual judges typically rule on procedural motions — details that only come from practicing in this jurisdiction day after day. That local familiarity can translate to better strategy, faster filings, and fewer costly surprises.
Looking for additional Florida attorneys? Browse all attorneys in Fort Lauderdale or all attorneys in Florida.
Frequently Asked
Common Questions About Ryan D. Burns
Where is Ryan D. Burns's law office located?
What practice areas does Ryan D. Burns handle?
How long has Ryan D. Burns practiced law?
Where did Ryan D. Burns go to law school?
How can I contact Ryan D. Burns for a consultation?
Professional Profile
Why Clients in Fort Lauderdale Choose Ryan D. Burns
Selecting an attorney is one of the most consequential decisions you can make when a legal matter arises. Below are the core qualities that distinguish Ryan D. Burns's practice in the field of personal injury, product liability, construction, litigation, and consumer.
Decade-Tested Legal Experience
Ryan D. Burns brings 20+ years of hands-on legal practice — enough to have navigated the recurring fact patterns, procedural traps, and negotiation dynamics that shape case outcomes.
Multi-State Bar Admission
Licensed in Florida, U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida, and U.S. District Court Middle District of Florida, Ryan D. Burns can represent clients in cases that span state lines or require counsel in multiple jurisdictions.
Broad Practice Area Coverage
Covering personal injury, product liability, and construction, Ryan D. Burns can address the full spectrum of a client's legal needs without requiring referrals to separate specialists for each issue.
Local Presence in Fort Lauderdale
A Fort Lauderdale-based practice means Ryan D. Burns attends hearings in the same courthouses, knows the local clerks, and understands the unwritten scheduling norms that affect every case filed here.
Case Types
Common Legal Issues Ryan D. Burns Handles in Fort Lauderdale
Below is a representative sample of the types of matters Ryan D. Burns has experience with under Florida law. If your situation involves one of these case categories, this attorney may be well positioned to help you understand your options.
This list is illustrative, not exhaustive. Contact Ryan D. Burns directly to discuss the specifics of your situation.
Search Reference
How People Find Ryan D. Burns Online
Prospective clients searching for legal help in Fort Lauderdale commonly use a combination of the attorney's name and their specific legal need. The following search terms frequently lead people to this profile and to attorneys like Ryan D. Burns.
If any of the above matches what you searched for, you've found the right profile. Use the contact options at the top of this page to get in touch with Ryan D. Burns directly.
Ryan D. Burns's Practice Areas & Specializations
Education & Law School Background
Bar Admissions & Licensed Jurisdictions
Client Reviews & Ratings — Ryan D. Burns
No reviews yet.