18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1192d
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1811BENN
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Amount — Contingency risk multiplier — Although counsel was not able to mitigate risk of non payment in any way, where relevant market did not require contingency risk multiplier to obtain competent counsel, multiplier is not applicable — Expert witness fees and costs awarded
AFFILIATED HEALTHCARE CENTER INC., a Florida Corporation, a/a/o Negel Damon Bennett, Plaintiff, v. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Florida Corporation, Defendant. County Court, 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County. Case No. 07-01979 CC 24. December 21, 2010. Honorable Darrin P. Gayles, Judge. Counsel: Scott J. Jontiff, Jontiff & Jontiff, Miami, for Plaintiff. Terri Kim, United Automobile Insurance Company, Miami Gardens, for Defendant.
FINAL JUDGMENT FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS
THIS CAUSE having come to be heard on December 17 and 21, 2010, on Plaintiff’s Motion For Order Determining Amount Of Attorney’s Fees And Costs, the Court having heard argument of counsel, the evidence presented at the hearing, testimony from expert witnesses Carlos A. Lopez, Jr., Esquire and Alison Clasby Harke, Esquire and having been otherwise fully advised in the premises, the Court makes the following ruling:
It is therefore ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. This Court has considered all of the factors enumerated in Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985). Specifically, This Court finds that counsel for Plaintiff, Scott J. Jontiff reasonably expended 165 hours, in the prosecution of this breach of contract (PIP) lawsuit. This finding is based upon the time records presented in evidence by Scott J. Jontiff with This Court and the testimony from the expert witnesses at the fee hearing.
2. Pursuant to Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 1985) and the factors enumerated in the Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility, this Court finds that Scott J. Jontiff is entitled to be compensated at the rate of $400.00 per hour for his time. This finding is based upon evidence presented concerning fees customarily charged in Miami-Dade County by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience and reputation for the quality of legal services performed in this case, the time limitations imposed by the circumstances, the nature and length of the professional relationship between Plaintiff and counsel and the experience, and the reputation and ability of Scott J. Jontiff.
3. Pursuant to Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 1985), this Court finds that the lodestar, the number of hours reasonably expended by attorney Scott J. Jontiff (165 hours) multiplied by the reasonable hourly rate of $400.00 per hour, is $66,000.00 in this case. The court finds that the 67.41% percent recovery should apply to the Lodestar for a recovery of 44,490.” Pursuant to the cases cited by the Court: TRUMBULL, ECKHARDT, BOARD OF REGENTS, DANIS.
4. This Court has considered all of the factors enumerated in Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985). Specifically, This Court finds that counsel for Plaintiff Jeanie M. Jontiff reasonably expended 93.6 hours, in the prosecution of this breach of contract (PIP) lawsuit. This finding is based upon the time records presented in evidence by Jeannie M. Jontiff with This Court and the testimony from the expert witnesses at the fee hearing.
5. Pursuant to Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 1985) and the factors enumerated in the Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility, this Court finds that Jeannie M. Jontiff is entitled to be compensated at the rate of $400.00 per hour for her time. This finding is based upon evidence presented concerning fees customarily charged in Miami-Dade County by lawyers of reasonably comparable skill, experience and reputation for the quality of legal services performed in this case, the time limitations imposed by the circumstances, the nature and length of the professional relationship between Plaintiff and counsel and the experience, and the reputation and ability of Jeannie M. Jontiff.
6. Pursuant to Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe. 472 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 1985), this Court finds that the lodestar, the number of hours reasonably expended by attorney Jeannie M. Jontiff (93.6 hours) multiplied by the reasonable hourly rate of $400.00 per hour, is $37,440.00 in this case. See TP 3 x 67.41 = $25,238.40.
7. This Court finds that pursuant to Plaintiff’s Contingency Fee Retainer agreement between Plaintiff and their counsel, Jontiff & Jontiff, Scott J. Jontiff and Jeannie M. Jontiff were employed on a pure contingency basis and consequently, this Court must consider a contingency risk factor (multiplier) since it is awarding a statutorily-directed reasonable attorney fee (pursuant to Florida Statute §627.428).
8. This Court has considered all of the factors enumerated in Standard Guaranty Insurance Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So.2d 828 (Fla. 1990). Specifically, This Court finds that this is a “category two case” (principally tort and contract cases). The Court finds that for this case, the relevant market did not require a contingency fee multiplier to obtain competent counsel, even though counsel for Plaintiff was not able to mitigate the risk of nonpayment in any way.
9. This Court has considered all of the factors enumerated in State Farm Fire & Casualty v. Palma, 555 So.2d 836 (Fla. 1990) and 629 So.2d 830 (Fla. 1993). Specifically, the fee agreement between Plaintiff and counsel in this case constituted a pure contingency fee arrangement, even though the amount of the fee was not to be determined by the amount of the recovery.
10. Consequently, pursuant to the foregoing cited authorities, this Court finds that a multiplier is not applicable in this ease.
11. This Court finds that Jontiff & Jontiff, Scott J. Jontiff and Jeannie M. Jontiff are entitled to recover a reasonable attorney’s fee from Defendant, UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, pursuant to Florida Statute §627.736, §627.428 and the applicable policy of insurance.
12. This Court has considered Florida Statute, §92.231 and Stokus v. Phillips, 651 So.2d 1244 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) [20 Fla. L. Weekly D627c]. The Court finds that Plaintiff’s expert witness, Carlos A. Lopez, Jr., Esquire, expected to be compensated for the services he rendered in this case. This Court finds that a reasonable amount of time expended by Plaintiff’s expert witness in this case is 9.4 hours and that a reasonable expert witness fee is $450.00 per hour. Consequently, Carlos A. Lopez, Jr., Esquire is entitled to be compensated for his expert witness services rendered in this matter in the amount of $4,230.00.
13. This Court determined that Plaintiff’s counsel was entitled to collect a fee award from Defendant on October 22, 2010, even though Defendant still disputed the amount of the fee they were entitled to collect. Consequently, pursuant to Quality Engineered Installation, Inc. v. Higley South, Inc., 670 So.2d 929 (Fla. 1996) [21 Fla. L. Weekly S141a], Plaintiff’s counsel is entitled to collect 6% interest per annum on the fee award of $69,729.00 from October 22, 2010 through December 21, 2010 (60 days), in the amount of $687.74.
14. This Court finds that Plaintiff’s counsel is entitled to taxable costs in the amount of $3,047.38, all of which the Court determines to be taxable against Defendant.
15. The Plaintiff is awarded a total amount of $77,694.12 against the Defendant, for which let execution issue.
16. This Court finds that this Final Judgment shall accrue the maximum legal interest rate per annum on the total award of $77,694.12 from the date of this Final Judgment through the date the total award is delivered to Jontiff & Jontiff, 3550 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 706, Miami, Florida 33137.
17. This Court reserves jurisdiction to enforce this Final Judgment, as well as any previous Judgements and/or Orders in this matter, and to do any and all other acts necessary in this cause.
