40 Fla. L. Weekly D1517b
175 So. 3d 308
Attorney’s fee — Appellate — Prevailing party on appeal — Award of appellate attorney’s fees conditioned upon party prevailing in underlying action by obtaining judgment for PIP benefits
VIRTUAL IMAGING SERVICES, INC., etc., Petitioner, vs. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent. 3rd District. Case No. 3D15-882. L.T. Case No. 14-165-AP. Opinion filed July 1, 2015. A Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Mindy S. Glazer, Cristina Miranda, Nushin G. Sayfie, Judges. Counsel: The Greenspan Law Firm, P.A., and Thomas E. Flanagan, III, and Charles J. Kane (Boca Raton), for petitioner. Michael J. Neimand, for respondent.
(Before ROTHENBERG, FERNANDEZ and SCALES, JJ.)
(FERNANDEZ, Judge.) Virtual Imaging Services, Inc., etc., petitions this Court for a writ of certiorari quashing the appellate division of the 11th Judicial Circuit Court’s denial of Virtual Imaging’s motion for an award of entitlement to appellate attorney’s fees, pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.400 and sections 627.428 and 627.736(8), Florida Statutes (2014). United Automobile Insurance Company concedes that appellate attorney’s fees should have been awarded because Virtual Imaging prevailed in the circuit court’s appellate division. However, because Virtual Imaging has not yet obtained a judgment for PIP benefits, we condition the appellate attorney’s fee award upon Virtual Imaging prevailing in the underlying action by obtaining a judgment for PIP benefits. See A. Carlo Guadagno, D.C. v. United Auto., 88 So. 3d 246 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011).
We therefore grant the petition for writ of certiorari and quash the decision of the circuit court appellate division denying Virtual Imaging’s motion for an award of entitlement to appellate attorney’s fees. We further remand to the appellate division for entry of an order conditionally granting Virtual Imaging’s motion for appellate attorney’s fees.
Petition granted, decision quashed, and case remanded with instructions.
