16 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 689a
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 167BLOME
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Amount of reasonable attorney’s fees determined — Expert witness fees, costs and prejudgment interest awarded
BRUCE M. GELCH, D.C., P.A., a Florida corporation, a/a/o Richard Blome, Plaintiff, vs. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Florida corporation, Defendant. County Court, 17th Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County, Civil Division. Case No. 07-8882 COCE 50. April 21, 2009. Peter Skolnik, Judge. Counsel: Douglas Harrison; and Nicole Malick, Nicole Malick, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale, for Plaintiff. Carlos Lidsky, for Defendant.
AGREED FINAL JUDGEMENT AND ORDER ON PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on Plaintiff’s having filed its Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs with Interest. Upon consideration and the Court having reviewed the Court file, including all pleadings, motions, and supporting documents, being otherwise fully advised in the premises, and the parties having agreed to the same, it is
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:
1. The Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs with Interest is hereby GRANTED.
2. In this case, the Plaintiff filed suit against the Defendant for personal injury protection benefits on a contingency fee basis. The Defendant originally denied the medical bills at issue which were submitted by the Plaintiff. The Defendant thereafter did not pay the correct amount after receiving the Plaintiff’s pre-suit demand letter. The Defendant thereafter defaulted after being served with the Plaintiff’s suit. The Plaintiff was required to litigate the matter and Plaintiff was ultimately successful. The Court finds the work performed by the Plaintiff was reasonable and necessary due to the conduct of the Defendant as a result of the manner in which the case was defended and the manner in which the Plaintiff’s attorneys were required to prosecute the case to its ultimate conclusion.
3. After considering all the pleadings, motions, and discovery, the Court finds as follows and the Defendant agrees to the following.
4. Douglas Harrison, Esq., is entitled to 26.6 hours for reasonable time expended in this case based on the conduct of the Defendant in denying the claim for PIP benefits, interest and damages, the manner in which the case was defended, the amount of time this attorney needed to bring this case to a conclusion, the amount recovered, and the specific factors discussed in Rowe, Bell, and the rules of Professional Responsibility 4-1.5. An hourly rate of $350 is reasonable for Douglas Harrison, Esq., in light of his background, education, and experience concentrated in PIP litigation.
5. Nicole Malick, Esq., is entitled to 3.4 hours for reasonable time expended in this case based on the conduct of the Defendant in denying the claim for PIP benefits, interest and damages, the manner in which the case was defended, the amount of time this attorney needed to bring this case to a conclusion, the amount recovered, and the specific factors discussed in Rowe, Bell, and the rules of Professional Responsibility 4-1.5. An hourly rate of $350 is reasonable for Nicole Malick, Esq. in the instant case, in light of her background, education, and experience concentrated in PIP litigation.
6. Plaintiff’s Expert Witness, Joseph R. Dawson, Esq., was necessary to render an opinion to the reasonable number of hours and a reasonable rate. Plaintiff’s expert was required to take time away from his practice, he had an expectation of getting paid for his time and, as a result, he is entitled to 1.5 hours for reasonable time spent in this case. An hourly rate of $400is reasonable for Plaintiff’s expert, in light of his background, education and experience.
7. The Plaintiff has waived its right to a multiplier. Accordingly, no multiplier will be awarded in this case. Likewise, there will be no lodestar reduction awarded based on the facts and evidence in this case.
8. The Plaintiff is awarded taxable costs in the amount of $316.
9. Judgment against the Defendant is GRANTED in the principal amount of $11,416(attorney’s fees, taxable costs and expert witness fee) plus prejudgment interest of 8% from 2/20/2009 (the date of the Judgment until today) in the amount of $138.08for a total amount of $11,554.08 (principal plus interest), for which let execution issue at the legal rate.
