Volume 10

10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 396a

Insurance — Appeals — Timeliness — Motion for rehearing of order dismissing appeal for lack of jurisdiction — Amended final judgment purporting to re-enter order enforcing settlement agreement and awarding prejudgment interest did not materially alter order so as to toll time for appeal where issue on appeal is not prejudgment interest but validity of settlement agreement insofar as it affects entitlement to attorney’s fees — Additional finding in amended final judgment that agreement was “written” does not affect appellant’s rights and obligations where, whatever form agreement took, trial court enforced it and circuit court considered its validity in first appeal, which challenged dismissal of motion to determine entitlement to attorney’s fees — No merit to contention that appellant did not have grounds to file cross-appeal challenging order enforcing settlement agreement in first appeal because order reflected intent of parties where, although order may have reflected parties’ intent when rendered, validity of agreement became contested prior to, and was ripe for review by time of, first appeal — Further, there is no merit to argument that if appellant had argued against order in first appeal, it would be seeking reversal of later order denying entitlement to attorney’s fees where appellant could have argued against attorney’s fees on ground that settlement agreement is invalid, and that trial court reached right result for wrong reason, and appellant, in fact, did make that argument in first appeal — Although in first appeal circuit court denied relief on rehearing stating that order on appeal was order denying motion to determine entitlement to attorney’s fees, not order enforcing settlement agreement, validity of the agreement is essential to determination of entitlement to attorney’s fees and circuit court did consider the issue — Rehearing denied

10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 395b

NOT FINAL VERSION OF OPINION
Subsequent Changes at 10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 396a

Insurance — Appeals — Timeliness — Order enforcing settlement agreement that ordered defendant to tender notice of dismissal with prejudice contemplated no further judicial labor and was, therefore, final order despite trial court’s characterization of order as interlocutory — Amended final judgment that purported to re-enter final order or revise final order in immaterial way did not toll time for appeal — Even if order were interlocutory, it merged into prior appeal that sought review of order denying plaintiff’s entitlement to attorney’s fees — Appeal dismissed for lack of jurisdiction

10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 547d

Insurance — Appeals — Stay of payment of fees and costs pending appeal, granted under condition that medical provider post bond, is lifted where bond was not posted

10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 379a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Discovery — Production of documents — Appeals — Certiorari — Order compelling production of documents causes irreparable harm sufficient to permit certiorari review and departs from essential requirements of law by allowing medical provider to obtain premature discovery in support of unripe bad faith claim entirely unrelated to provider’s underlying PIP claims as assignee of insured and requiring production of document that may be protected by trade secret privilege without first conducting in camera review — Discovery sought to show insurer’s reasons for paying bills at preferred provider rates is not relevant to claim for insurance benefits — Privilege — Trade secrets — Argument that insurer failed to provide evidence to support assertion that document contains trade secrets lacks merit where, by failing to conduct in camera inspection, trial court refused to even reach stage where insurer could submit evidence on trade secrets — Insurer did not waive trade secrets privilege regarding agreement between insurer and software company by asserting affirmative defense based on agreements between insurer and PPO network and between medical provider and PPO network — Claim of trade secrets privilege was also not waived by insurer’s failure to file privilege log where, because insurer raised trade secrets objection to only one discovery request, it was clear which privilege insurer was invoking for which document — Trial court’s offer to seal document after insurer produced it is inadequate substitute for in camera inspection prior to production — Order compelling production quashed

10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 679a

Insurance — Appeals — Where issue of standing based on purported invalidity of assignment was directly raised on appeal, and issue of whether policy was assignable was only raised by mention in statement of facts, court could have considered the issue of transferability of policy waived but was not required to do so — Evidence — Trial court’s denial of admissibility of affidavit on ground that there was issue as to whether affiant had personal knowledge is affirmed where, even if ruling was close call, there is no demonstrated prejudice because decision is order denying summary judgment

10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 164b

Insurance — Appeals — Argument — Comments in closing argument, which were not objected to at trial, did not rise to level justifying new trial