13 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 1211b
Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Personal injury protection — Expert witnesses — Evidence is insufficient to establish that proffered expert witness maintains requisite expertise to testify as to reasonable attorney’s fees and costs — Disqualification of expert is insufficient reason to continue attorney’s fees hearing — Medical provider’s counsel is not accepted as expert witness as to own fees and costs — Even if provider’s counsel were competent to testify as expert witness regarding own fees and costs, provider did not satisfy burden to offer counsel as expert witness — Provider’s reasonable fees and costs are deemed to be zeroREVERSED at14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 821a
INJURY CARE INSTITUTE, LLC (a/a/o MARISOL ZUMBADO), Plaintiff, vs. MERCURY INSURANCE COMPANY OF FLORIDA, Defendant. County Court, 13th Judicial Circuit in and for Hillsborough County, Small Claims Division. Case No. 05-20926-SC, Division H. September 28, 2006. Eric R. Myers, Judge. Counsel: Bradley D. Souders, Bradley D. Souders, P.A., Tampa, for Plaintiff. David B. Kampf, Ramey & Kampf, Tampa, for Defendant.
ORDER AS TO PLAINTIFF’S FEES AND COSTS
THIS CAUSE having come before the Court on September 12, 2006 on Plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs, and the Court having heard argument of Counsel, having reviewed the file and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. Based on the evidence presented, this Court finds that there is insufficient testimony to establish Jason Lamoureux, Esquire maintains the requisite expertise to serve and testify as to reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred by Plaintiff and Plaintiff’s counsel in the current proceeding. This Court finds that Mr. Lamoureux shall not be accepted to serve as an expert as to Plaintiff’s attorneys’ fees and costs.
2. This Court further finds that Plaintiff maintains the burden to proceed with the hearing to determine reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs based on the fact that the hearing had been initiated. An adverse ruling finding that Mr. Jason Lamoureux may not testify as an expert witness in the current proceeding is an insufficient basis to continue per Plaintiff’s Ore Tenus Motion. Therefore, Plaintiff’s Motion to Continue shall be DENIED.
3. This Court further finds that Mr. Brad Souders, Plaintiff’s counsel, who is seeking attorneys’ fees and costs in the current proceeding, shall not be accepted as an expert witness to testify as to his own attorneys’ fees and costs. Even should this Court determine that Mr. Souders was competent or able to testify as an expert witness as to his own fees and costs, the lack of evidence and testimony to support Mr. Souders’ statement that he may be an expert witness fails. Plaintiff did not establish the burden to offer Mr. Brad Souders as an expert witness.
4. Based on the above and the fact that Plaintiff failed to produce an expert witness to testify as to Plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in the current proceeding, this Court finds that Plaintiff’s reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs are deemed to be zero. Insufficient facts, evidence and testimony were presented to award reasonable attorneys’ fees, including hourly rate (lodestar fee) incurred by Mr. Souders, the reasonable number of hours, and fee enhancement/multiplier.
5. Therefore, Plaintiff shall not be awarded attorneys’ fees and costs.
* * *
