37 Fla. L. Weekly D285a
79 So. 3d 868
Attorney’s fees — Appellate — Insurance — Dispute between provider and insurer — Pursuant to section 627.428(1), provider is entitled to appellate attorney’s fees contingent upon it prevailing in underlying action on remand — Order of circuit court, acting in its appellate capacity, denying motion for appellate fees quashed
HALLANDALE CHIROPRACTIC CENTER (a/a/o Kristi Cox), Petitioner, v. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. 4th District. Case No. 4D11-2761. February 1, 2012. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Peter Weinstein, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 09-17029 (12) and 08-26427 (25). Counsel: Marlene S. Reiss of Marlene S. Reiss, Esq., P.A., Miami, for petitioner. Michael J. Neimand, Miami, for respondent.
(Per Curiam.) Hallandale Chiropractic Center seeks review of the circuit court’s denial of a motion for appellate attorney’s fees. Hallandale prevailed in part on appeal, and the insurer agrees that pursuant to section 627.428(1), Florida Statutes, Hallandale is entitled to appellate attorney’s fees contingent upon it prevailing in the underlying action on remand. Danis Indus. Corp. v. Ground Improvement Techniques, Inc., 645 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1994); Ramirez v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 67 So. 3d 1174 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011); Comprehensive Health Ctr., LLC v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 36 Fla. L. Weekly D1553 (Fla. 3d DCA July 20, 2011). Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari and quash the denial of Hallandale’s motion for appellate attorney’s fees. On remand the court shall grant the motion contingent on petitioner prevailing in the trial court.
Petition Granted. (May, C.J., Gross and Conner, JJ., concur.)
