Blog Articles

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 201a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1802WOOD

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Amount — Contingency risk multiplier — Where use of multiplier was necessary to obtain competent counsel in case, medical provider’s counsel could not mitigate risk of nonpayment, amount in controversy was small and results obtained were excellent, contingency fee agreement between provider and its counsel allows for multiplier, and provider’s chances of success at outset were 50%, multiplier of 1.5 is appropriate — Costs, expert witness fees, and prejudgment interest are awarded

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

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1020a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1809CHES

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Amount — Contingency risk multiplier of 1.5 is appropriate where attorney for medical provider was not able to mitigate risk of nonpayment, and provider’s likelihood of success was more likely than not from outset — No merit to argument that multiplier is not appropriate because provider did not have difficulty obtaining counsel in this case due to existing relationship with attorney — Expert witness fee, costs and prejudgment interest awarded

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1016a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1809MEAD

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Amount — Hours reasonably expended — There is no requirement that attorney’s time records itemize time spent on each task within day — Interoffice meetings between attorney and paralegal necessary to coordinate efforts and reduce duplication are compensable — Attorney travel time to appear in person at hearings and depositions of key witnesses is reasonable and is compensable at regular rate — Hours sought by medical provider’s counsel are reasonable in view of insurer’s “go to the mat” defense — Contingency risk multiplier of 2.0 is appropriate where likelihood of success was even or unlikely at outset of case, attorney was unable to mitigate risk of nonpayment, market requires multiplier in PIP cases, attorney recovered more than amount originally sought, and agreement between provider and attorney was pure contingency fee agreement — No merit to argument that necessity of multiplier to obtain competent counsel can only be established by provider’s testimony that he had difficulty obtaining counsel and not by expert testimony of market conditions — Costs, including travel expenses to attend depositions, expert witness fees and prejudgment interest are awarded

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1202a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1811JEFF

Insurance — Attorney’s fees — Amount

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 169c

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1802PHIL

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Error to enter summary judgment in favor of medical provider where questions remain as to whether uncle who executed assignment for treatment of injured minor was minor’s guardian

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 258a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1803BEAT

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Validity — No error in denying directed verdict on issue of validity of assignment of benefits where insurer did not present evidence that assignment was false or was never executed — Jury properly considered testimony regarding authenticity of assignment

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 210a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1802MCKE

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Demand letter — Billing ledgers which were attached to demand letters and which list CPT codes and amounts billed are sufficient to overcome any alleged confusion in body of letters and suffice to put insurer on notice of dates and amounts of services — Assignment submitted with demand letters is sufficient — Moreover, insurer that is not party to assignment or in privity with parties to assignment has no standing to challenge any defects in assignment — Medical provider’s claim that insurer waived defense of defective demand letters by failing to allege defects in responses to demand letters raises issue of fact precluding summary judgment based on defective demand letter issue

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 494a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1805LABA

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Coverage — Medical benefits — Standing — Assignment — Language of assignment was legally sufficient to convey standing on provider to file suit for PIP benefits

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 615b

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1807FIEL

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Dispute between insured and insurer — Where insured had assigned benefits to two medical providers at time that he filed suit for unpaid PIP benefits, insured did not have standing when suit was filed — Insured’s lack of standing could not be cured by providers’ revocation of assignments after suit was filed