Volume 10

Case Search

MEDICAL REHAB AND THERAPY CENTER, d/b/a PAIN CORRECTIVE CENTER OF BRANDON, Plaintiff, vs. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant(s).

10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 643b

Attorney’s fees — Justiciable issues — Insurance — Personal injury protection — Insurer awarded attorney’s fees pursuant to sections 768.79 and 57.105 in action brought by provider for failure to pay PIP benefits and/or failure to make payments within thirty days based on finding that reasonable presuit investigation would have revealed that all benefits due were paid and policy limits exhausted nine months prior to filing of action

Read More »

PROGRESSIVE BAYSIDE INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. FISHMAN & STASHAK, M.D.’S, P.A., d/b/a GOLDCOAST ORTHOPEDICS, (Danielle Fitzgerald), Respondent.

10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 701a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Appellate — Justiciable issues — Appellate court has jurisdiction to entertain section 57.105 motion for attorney’s fees despite insurer’s voluntary dismissal of petitions for writ of certiorari — Where insurer had no basis to seek disqualification of co-counsel of law firm representing various plaintiffs in actions against insurer on ground that law firm had hired attorney who was formerly employed by insurer as claims litigation specialist, and insurer knew or should have known that 73 petitions for writ of certiorari contesting denials of motions for disqualification and motions to stay proceedings to allow insurer to investigate and corroborate motions for disqualification were not supported by material facts necessary to establish claim and application of law to those facts, it does not appear that petitions were filed in good faith, but rather, for purpose of delay — Attorney’s fees awarded

Read More »

PROGRESSIVE EXPRESS INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. DR. TIM D. CHAPMAN d/b/a SEMINOLE CHIROPRACTIC MEDICINE, ASSIGNEE FOR LARIZA BRITTAIN, Appellees.

10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 574a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Attorney’s fees — Because insured’s affidavit stating that she does not recall assigning her benefits and did not intend to do so does not contradict medical provider’s assertion that insured did assign her PIP benefits to his office, trial court had competent substantial evidence to support finding that there was an assignment and that medical provider is entitled to award of attorney’s fees

Read More »
Skip to content