23 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 781a
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2307DALLInsurance — 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
JOSEPH DALLEY and LIVERTA DALLEY, Plaintiff, vs. TOWER HILL PRIME INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 17th Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County. Case No. 15-10058 COCE (53). December 8, 2015. Robert W. Lee, Judge. Counsel: Tracy Kramer, Miami, for Plaintiff. Michelle Smith, Fort Lauderdale, for Defendant.
FINAL JUDGMENT ON ARBITRATOR’S DECISIONIN FAVOR OF PLAINTIFF
THIS CAUSE came before the Court for consideration of the notice of filing Arbitration Award filed by the Honorable Gary Cowart, 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 on November 5, 2015. In order to reject an arbitrator’s decision, a party must request a trial de novo, Fla. Stat. §44.103(5), which provides “some notice to the opposing party that its adversary is rejecting an arbitration award and renewing its demand for trial.” Nicholson-Kenny Capital Management, Inc. v. Steinberg, 932 So.2d 321, 324 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) [30 Fla. L. Weekly D2825c]. 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) [28 Fla. L. Weekly D1795a]. See also Johnson v. Levine, 736 So.2d 1235, 1238 n.3 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) [24 Fla. L. Weekly D1456a]; Klein v. J.L. Howard, Inc., 600 So.2d 511, 512 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). 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 with the Clerk no later than November 30, 2015. (A five-day mailing period is added because the arbitrator served his decision by mail and/or email.) See Federated Financial Corp. of America v. Cohen, 14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 981b (Broward Cty. Ct. 2007); Rule 1.090(e). The Court has confirmed with the Clerk that it is current with docketing through the filing deadline. 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. 839b (Broward Cty. Ct. 2003). Accordingly, the Court has this day reviewed the Arbitrator’s decision. In the Court’s view, the Arbitration Decision clearly reflects that the arbitrator appropriately considered the parties’ arguments, as well as their submitted stipulations and evidence. Rule 1.820(c). As a result, it is hereby ADJUDGED THAT the Plaintiff shall recover from the Defendant, TOWER HILL PRIME INSURANCE COMPANY, the sum of $11,956.83, less any policy deductible, which sum shall hereafter bear interest at the rate of 4.75% per annum. The Plaintiff is also entitled to an award of attorney’s fees, and costs, which the Court reserves jurisdiction to determine.
