27 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 129a
Online Reference: FLWSUPP 2702MARQInsurance — Attorney’s fees — Appellate attorney’s fees granted contingent on finding that insurer filed valid proposal for settlement and satisfied requirements of proposal for settlement statute
UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. GABLES INSURANCE RECOVERY, INC a/a/o Laraine Marques, Appellee. Circuit Court, 11th Judicial Circuit (Appellate) in and for Miami-Dade County. Case No. 16-138 AP. L.T. Case No. 2014-002398-SP-24. March 18, 2019. An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Donald J. Canava, Judge. Counsel: Michael J. Neimand, United Automobile Insurance Company, for Appellant. G. Bart Billbrough, Billbrough & Marks, P.A., for Appellee.
(Before RODRIGUEZ, ZAYAS, and SANTOVENIA, JJ.)ON MOTION FOR REHEARING[Original Opinion at 26 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 460a]
(PER CURIAM.) This is a motion for rehearing or clarification as provided for by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330, filed by United Automobile Insurance Company (“United”) and Gables Insurance Recovery, Inc. (“GIR”). “The motion for rehearing is not a vehicle for counsel or the party to continue its attempts at advocacy.” Goter v. Brown, 682 So. 2d 155 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996) [21 Fla. L. Weekly D2109a], rev. denied, 690 So.2d 1299 (Fla. 1997). Motions for rehearing or clarification are strictly limited to calling an appellate court’s attention-without argument to a matter which the appellate court has overlooked or misapprehended. Cleveland v. State, 887 So. 2d 362, 364 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) [29 Fla. L. Weekly D1627b]. We DENY United’s motion in part, and GRANT GIR’s motion and United’s motion in part, only to the extent to clarify the grant of United’s motion regarding appellate attorney’s fees.
We withdraw only the portion of our previous opinion addressing the grant of United’s motion regarding appellate attorney’s fees, and leave the remainder of the opinion in place.
We hereby GRANT United’s motion for appellate attorney’s fees contingent on a finding by the trial court that United filed a valid proposal for settlement, has demonstrated entitlement to recovery, and has satisfied all of the requirements under the proposal for settlement statute, Section 768.79, Florida Statutes.
REMANDED. (RODRIGUEZ, ZAYAS, and SANTOVENIA, JJ. concur.)
