17 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 219a
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 1703ESTIInsurance — Personal injury protection — Arbitration — Where parties did not request trial de novo within deadline for such request, trial court must enter judgment in accordance with arbitrator’s decision
OAKLAND PARK MRI, INC. (a/a/o Hadly Estime), Plaintiff, vs. UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 17th Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County. Case No. 08-5459 COCE (53). January 12, 2010. Robert W. Lee, Judge. Counsel: Charles J. Kane, Boca Raton, for Plaintiff. Camile Riviere, Miami Gardens, for Defendant. H. Mark Purdy, Fort Lauderdale, Arbitrator.
FINAL JUDGMENT ON ARBITRATOR’S DECISION IN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF
THIS CAUSE came before the Court for consideration of the notice of filing Arbitration Award filed by the Arbitrator H. Mark Purdy, and the Court’s having reviewed the docket, the entire Court file, and the relevant legal authorities; and having been sufficiently advised in the premises, the Court finds as follows:
This case was submitted to mandatory arbitration. The arbitrator served his decision by fax on December 15, 2009. Under Rule 1.820(h), Fla. R. Civ. P., a motion for trial de novo must be “made” within 20 days of the “service” of the arbitrator’s decision. Under Florida law, “a party has the right to move for a trial within twenty days after service of the arbitrator’s decision. If no motion for trial is timely served, then the trial court must enforce the decision of the arbitrator and has no discretion to do otherwise” (emphasis added). Bacon Family Partners, L.P. v. Apollo Condominium Ass’n, 852 So.2d 882, 888 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). See also Johnson v. Levine, 736 So.2d 1235, 1238 n.3 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Klein v. J.L. Howard, Inc., 600 So.2d 511, 512 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). The Arbitration Decision reflects that the arbitrator appropriately considered the parties’ arguments, as well as their submitted evidence. Rule 1.820(c). The Court lacks discretion to deny entry of a judgment in accordance with the arbitrator’s decision when the parties fail to timely request a trial de novo or otherwise fail to dispose of the case of record within the de novo deadline.
The parties’ request for trial de novo was required to be filed no later than January 4, 2010. The five-day mailing period is not added because the arbitrator did not serve his decision by U.S. mail. See Federated Financial Corp. of America v. Cohen, 14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 981 (Broward Cty. Ct. 2007); Rule 1.090(e). Neither party filed a timely request. As a result, the Court is required to enter judgment in accordance with the Arbitrator’s decision. See Gossett & Gossett, P.A. v. Fleming, 10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 839 (Broward Cty. Ct. 2003). Accordingly, the Court has this day unsealed the Arbitrator’s decision. As a result, it is hereby
ADJUDGED THAT:
The Plaintiff shall recover from the Defendant, UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, the sum of $1,072.21, which such sum shall hereafter bear interest at the rate of 6% per annum, for which sums let execution issue. The Plaintiff is also entitled to an award of attorney’s fees and costs, which the Court reserves jurisdiction to determine.
