11 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1007d
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Dispute regarding PPO reductions taken by insurer on bills submitted for treatment of insured
MAI UNDERWOOD, Plaintiff, vs. PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 9th Judicial Circuit in and for Orange County. Case No. CCO-03-4596. Div.73-PIP. September 1, 2004. Wayne Shoemaker, Judge. Counsel: Alexander Billias, Morgan, Colling & Gilbert, P.A., Orlando, for Plaintiff. Julian Gonzalez, Orlando, for Defendant.
ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS
THIS CAUSE was heard before the Court on September 1, 2004, on Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs. At the outset of this case, the underlying issues in this PIP case involved PPO reductions taken by Defendant on bills submitted for treatment to Plaintiff.
The Court has considered the testimony submitted in evidence by counsel for the Plaintiff and Defendant. The Court has also considered the expert testimony presented by both Plaintiff and Defendant regarding a reasonable fee, reasonable number of hours expended and whether a multiplier should be applied in the present case. Based on the foregoing, the Court hereby makes the following findings of fact and conclusions of law:
1. Plaintiff’s attorney is entitled to a reasonable attorney’s fee and costs incurred in the prosecution of the above-styled cause.
2. The attorney for the Plaintiff in this case is ALEXANDER BILLIAS.
3. The reasonable hours expended during the prosecution of the Plaintiff’s case by ALEXANDER BILLIAS, ESQUIRE, shall be 12 hours.
4. In light of the number of hours presented by evidence, a reasonable hourly rate for ALEXANDER BILLIAS, ESQUIRE, shall be $250.00 per hour.
5. The lodestar amount shall be determined from the reasonable hourly rate multiplied by the number of reasonable hours:
$250.00 (hourly rate) x 12 (# of hours) = $3,000.00
Lodestar Total: $ 3,000.00
6. After consideration of the evidence presented, the applicable Florida statutes and the relevant case law of Standard Guaranty Ins. Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So.2d 828 (Fla. 1990) and Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985), this Court finds that the application of a contingency risk multiplier X IS/ ___ IS NOT appropriate in this case.
7. After consideration of the evidence presented, the applicable Florida statutes and the relevant case law of Standard Guaranty Ins. Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 1990) and Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985), the Court finds that the likelihood of success for the Plaintiff at the onset in this case was:
___ more likely even at the outset (1.0-1.5)
X approximately even at the outset (1.5-2.0)
___ unlikely at the outset (2.0-2.5).
8. After consideration of the evidence presented, the applicable Florida statutes and the relevant case law of Standard Guaranty Ins. Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 1990) and Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985), the Court further finds that a multiplier in the range of 1.5 to 2.0 is reasonable.
9. The amount of reasonable attorney’s fees shall be calculated by the multiplication of the lodestar total from paragraph number 5 and the appropriate, if any, lodestar multiplier from paragraph number 8.
Lodestar Total $3,000.00 (paragraph #5)
Lodestar Multiplier x1.75 (paragraph #8)
Total: $5,250.00
10. As to JEFFREY M. BYRD, ESQUIRE, Plaintiff’s expert witness:
a.) Based upon Travieso v. Travieso, 474 So. 2d 1184 (Fla. 1985); Stokus v. Phillips, 651 So.2d 1244 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); and Mangel v. Bob Dance Dodge, Inc., 739 So.2d 720 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), the Court finds that Plaintiff X IS/ ___ IS NOT entitled to recover the expert witness fee of attorney JEFFREY M. BYRD and that:
b.) 3.7 hours is a reasonable amount of hours; and
c.) $350.00 per hour is a reasonable hourly rate.
11. Accordingly, the expert witness fees that Plaintiff is entitled to recover from Defendant on behalf of its expert witness is $1,295.00.
12. The Court has considered the costs Affidavit submitted by the Plaintiff in this case. The Plaintiff’s attorney is entitled to reasonable costs in the amount of $170.00.
WHEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
A. Plaintiff is entitled to a reasonable attorney’s fee in the amount of $5,250.00 to be paid by the Defendant.
B. Plaintiff is entitled to recover an expert witness fee in the amount of $1,295.00 to be paid by the Defendant.
C. Plaintiff is entitled to reasonable costs in the amount of $170.00 to be paid by the Defendant.
D. Defendant shall pay the foregoing amounts to counsel for the Plaintiff within twenty (20) days of the date of entry of this Order.
E. The Court shall reserve jurisdiction for entry of a final judgment as to attorney’s fees and costs.
F. Pursuant to Quality Engineered Installation, Inc. v. Higley South, Inc., 670 So.2d 929 (Fla. 1996) and Boulis v. Florida Department of Transportation, 733 So.2d 959 (Fla. 1999), prejudgment interest shall accrue from December 11, 2003 (date of settlement of underlying issues), through the date of the entry of this Order in the amount of $266.84.
FOR WHICH LET EXECUTION ISSUE FORTHWITH.
* * *
