Volume 14

14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 71b

Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Personal injury protection — Contingency risk multiplier — Where medical provider was represented on purely contingent fee basis, relevant market requires contingency risk multiplier to obtain competent counsel in PIP cases, and likelihood of success for provider at outset of case was even, multiplier of 1.75 is awarded — Costs and expert witness fees awarded

14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 529a

Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Personal injury protection — Contingency risk multiplier — No error to award multiplier where record demonstrates relevant market required multiplier to obtain competent counsel — Award of 2.0 multiplier was abuse of discretion where case involving equitable assignment was not novel or complex

14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 28b

Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Personal injury protection — Contingency risk multiplier — Error to find that issue of missed independent medical examination made case complicated enough to justify multiplier where only benefits at issue were those accrued prior to scheduled IME — Application of multiplier is not appropriate penalty for delay in paying benefits — Difficulty of practicing PIP law and difficulty of case are factors that affect number of hours, not application of multiplier — Error to find that multiplier was necessary for medical provider to obtain competent counsel where there is no record evidence to support conclusion that provider had difficulty finding competent counsel, and fact that counsel approached provider and there was pre-existing relationship between provider and counsel contradicts finding — Although there is support for trial court’s conclusion that insurer was arrogant in failing to timely pay benefits it legitimately owed with virtually no meaningful defense, multiplier is not to be used as punitive measure — Length of time matter dragged on does not justify imposition of multiplier

14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 882b

Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Personal injury protection — Contingency risk multiplier — Where insured’s likelihood of success in PIP case involving numerous defenses including EUO no show issue was unlikely, insured’s expert testified that he would not have taken case and only reason insured prevailed was attorney’s tenacity and litigation skills, and insured’s attorney attempted to mitigate risk of nonpayment by filing multiple summary judgment motions and accepting partial judgment on claim, multiplier of 2.5 is appropriate

14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 823a

Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Personal injury protection — Hours — Abuse of discretion to award fees to insured’s attorney for 20 hours less than insurer’s expert testified was reasonable — Error to calculate prejudgment interest from date other than date agreed upon by parties and to deny insured’s motion for additional hearing time to consider time spent litigating issue of entitlement to fees — Timeliness of motion — No abuse of discretion in granting motion to enlarge time for filing motion for attorney’s fees where attorney’s affidavits established excusable neglect — Contingency risk multiplier — No abuse of discretion to award 2.0 multiplier where insured signed contingency fee agreement, and there was testimony that market required multiplier to secure competent counsel due to complexity of case and lack of competent counsel in market and that there was no way to mitigate risk of nonpayment

14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 803a

Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Personal injury protection — Alleged co-counsel for medical provider is not entitled to attorney’s fees where attorney is independent of medical provider’s counsel of record and did not file notice of appearance, sign any pleading, or attend any hearing or deposition and was totally unknown to opposing counsel or court until bill for fees was submitted after close of case

14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 523a

Insurance — Automobile — Cancellation — Appeals — Timeliness — Insured’s motion for rehearing was timely when measured by date of service rather than date of filing; therefore, appeal filed within 30 days of order on motion for rehearing was also timely filed — Law of case doctrine did not preclude trial court from entering summary judgment on remand after entry of appellate order finding that neither party’s motion for summary judgment should have been granted due to existence of factual issues where appellate court’s statement was not decision on question of law, and record before trial court following remand was different from record on appeal — Insured is estopped from arguing on appeal that disputed issues of fact regarding cancellation of policy exist that precluded entry of summary judgment for insurer where insured argued to trial court that no material issues of fact existed on that issue — No error in denying insured’s motion for rehearing seeking to amend complaint to plead promissory estoppel where insured could not have pled viable estoppel theory — Attorney’s fees — Appellate — Justiciable issues — Motion for section 57.105 fees is denied for failure to afford safe harbor period to insured

14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 742a

Insurance — Attorney’s fees — Appellate

14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 25a

Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Personal injury protection — Contingency risk multiplier — Although there was conclusory testimony from medical provider’s expert that expert would not have taken case but for prospect of multiplier and that market requires multiplier, in absence of testimony from provider regarding difficulty in obtaining competent counsel, Quanstrom requirement that relevant market requires multiplier to obtain competent counsel is not met — Further, fact that provider had long-standing relationship with counsel tends to negate notion that provider had difficulty obtaining competent counsel in case — Trial court’s ruling that provider’s counsel attempted to mitigate risk of nonpayment but was unable to do so is not supported by record where counsel did not provide meaningful evidence that provider was unable to pay hourly fee, counsel did not even attempt to obtain hourly fee from provider, and long-standing relationship between provider and counsel would justify long-standing retainer agreement — In absence of express holding that multipliers cannot be applied in PIP cases, court declines to conclude that supreme court’s decision in Sarkis case removes ability to seek multiplier in all PIP cases — Hours — Where provider prevailed on claim for only one of two dates of service at issue, trial court erred in deducting hours spent after entry of final summary judgment from fee award but failing to make further deduction for provider’s losing claim — No merit to argument that insurer waived issue by failing to seek rehearing of judgment awarding fees where court did not reserve jurisdiction on any issue and, therefore, neither objection nor motion for rehearing was necessary to challenge sufficiency of evidence

14 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 668b

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Standing — Assignment — Document purporting to be an assignment was not binding on insurer where document was not signed and dated by provider, as specifically required by document — Insurer did not waive defense of invalid assignment by waiting until 3 years after suit was filed to set hearing on motion for summary judgment where defense was raised in answer and amended answer, and insurer established that it originally received completely blank assignment form and waited until after provider produced more fully completed, but unexecuted, form in response to request for production before bringing motion for summary judgment before court