Florida's Recent News

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 585a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1807LAMA

Insurance — Automobile — Coverage — Error to enter summary judgment for insurer where there exist factual issues as to whether insured timely sought to add new vehicle to policy and whether agent’s alleged acts and omissions can be imputed to insurer

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 73a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1801SNUG

Insurance — Automobile — Coverage — Exclusions — Business purposes — Where insured’s vehicle was stolen while insured was delivering newspapers and later wrecked by thief, coverage is precluded by policy exclusion for damage arising out of use of vehicle to carry persons or property for compensation, including delivery of newspapers

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 161a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1802SANC

Insurance — Automobile — Coverage — Non-renewal of policy — Notice — Error to enter summary judgment finding that insurer was required to extend coverage under lapsed policy due to its failure to send renewal letter where insurer filed affidavits attesting that it sent notice of renewal and never refused to renew policy, insured provided no evidence that he took necessary steps to avoid policy lapse, policy provided that insured’s failure to pay premium required to renew policy would be construed as refusal of renewal offer and policy would expire without notice, and insured purchased policy with another carrier

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 299c

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1803ROJA

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Proposal for settlement — Strict adherence to rule allowing service of proposal for settlement on plaintiff no earlier than 90 days after commencement of action is not warranted — Proposals which offered to settle “all claims” and which clearly set forth non-monetary terms were not ambiguous — Offers for nominal amounts were made in good faith, and reasonableness of offers is supported by zero dollar verdict

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 682a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1808DOR

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Proposal for settlement — Nominal $250 proposal for settlement was not made in good faith where at time offer was made, insurer did not have reasonable basis for concluding that its exposure was nominal in light of attorney’s fees and costs already incurred in years-long litigation, fact that medical provider had prevailed on all of insurer’s affirmative defenses, impossibility of predicting whether jury would believe insurer’s expert or treating physician regarding necessity of MRI, and insurer’s reliance on peer review which was unsupported by physical examination at a time when the law regarding whether insurer could rely on such reviews was in flux — Insurer’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs is denied

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 457a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1805MONT

Insurance — Attorney’s fees — Timeliness of motion — No merit to argument that, as prevailing party under section 627.428, insured was not required to serve motion for attorney’s fees within 30 days of judgment — Abuse of discretion to find that one-day delay in serving motion for fees resulted from excusable neglect where insured did not make motion alleging excusable neglect or give notice as required by rule 1.090(b)(2), and insured offered no explanation to justify extension of time except counsel’s inadvertence — Final judgment taxing attorney’s fees and costs is reversed

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 302a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1803COLE

Insurance — Attorney’s fees — Prevailing party — Medical provider that did not recover more than presuit settlement offer is not prevailing party entitled to award of attorney’s fees

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1054a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1810JTOR

Insurance — Attorney’s fees — Prejudgment interest is awarded to medical provider despite six-year delay between determination of entitlement to attorney’s fees and entry of final judgment on fee and cost award where there are no equitable circumstances supporting denial of prejudgment interest

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 693a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1808REDD

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Sanctions — Attorney’s fees — Where benefits were exhausted after medical provider filed suit but insurer failed to notify its own counsel or provider’s counsel of exhaustion of benefits for seven months, and provider’s counsel would not have continued to attempt to prosecute case if insurer had advised of exhaustion of benefits, provider’s motion for sanctions of attorney’s fees and costs is granted

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 337a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1804GOVE

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Demand letter — Error to strike insurer’s defense of insufficient demand letters where demand letters included bills for total amounts of MRIs that did not account for partial payments made by insurer — Attorney’s fees — Even if judgment below had been properly entered against insurer, medical provider should not have been awarded attorney’s fees where litigation was necessitated by insurer’s inability to comply with unclear demand letters

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 35a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1801HERN

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Proposal for settlement — Section 768.79 provides sufficient procedural guidance to make it an independent authority for award of attorney’s fees without invocation of rule 1.442 in small claims cases — Error to conclude that medical provider is prevailing party because it prevailed on significant issue where jury found that some of treatment was reasonable, related and necessary but returned zero-damages verdict — Remand for consideration of validity of insurer’s proposal for settlement

18 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 30a

Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1801LEHR

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Prevailing party — Fee agreement — No abuse of discretion in assessing attorney’s fees against insurer without requiring prevailing medical provider to produce retainer agreement to ensure that fee award does not exceed fee agreement between provider and his attorney where no written fee agreement existed, and provider’s attorney agreed orally to collect attorney’s fees based on court’s determination in accordance with PIP statute