Volume 6

6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 609a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Discontinuation of benefits after independent medical examination — Where insured prevailed in action against insurer, and insured’s expert witness testified that he expected to be paid for his testimony, trial court properly awarded expert witness fee to insured — Attorney’s fees — Insured sufficiently pled entitlement to attorney’s fees — Evidence insufficient to support fee award where insured’s attorney failed to submit sworn affidavit or testify as to how much time he spent on the case — Remand for evidentiary hearing on attorney’s fees issue

6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 604b

Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Personal injury protection — Insured’s complaint, although imperfectly pled, gave insurer sufficient notice of cause of action for attorney’s fees under no-fault law where complaint alleged that insurer failed to pay benefits in accordance with Florida Automobile Reparations Reform Act, further alleged that plaintiff had to retain counsel in order to compel payment of benefits and was entitled to recover reasonable attorney’s fees for prosecution of action, and requested attorney’s fees in “WHEREFORE CLAUSE,” which demanded court costs, attorney’s fees, and other reasonable relief

6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 155c

Insurance — Automobile — Exclusions — Rental vehicles

6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 102b

Insurance — Attorney’s fees and costs — Insured prevailing in action against insurer

6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 790b

Insurance — Attorney’s fees — Prevailing party — Plaintiff entitled to attorney’s fees as prevailing party pursuant to attorney’s fees provision set forth in section 627.736(4), Florida Statutes, where defendant paid claims prior to arbitration hearing but after plaintiff filed lawsuit and demand for arbitration — Defendant cannot avoid liability for attorney’s fees by paying claims after suit is filed

6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 640a

Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Motion for attorney’s fees and costs arising from underlying insurance dispute in which insured’s claim for property damage to her truck was denied, insurer completely denied coverage under insured’s policy, and insurer voided policy based upon position that insured had made material misrepresentations on her application for insurance — Hours spent by attorney were reasonable and necessary — Time spent was devoted to legal research, drafting of pleadings, keeping client informed of proceedings, and pursuing settlement discussions with insurer — Testimony of insurer’s expert witnesses that less time should have been spent is not persuasive — Fees for litigating entitlement to attorney’s fees — While it appeared that defense agreed that it owed a fee, there were issues of entitlement as to prejudgment interest, multiplier, attorney’s fees after entry of judgment, and market rate — Half of hours spent after plaintiff obtained settlement, including half of hours spent at hearing, will be allowed as litigation over entitlement to attorneys fees for purely legal issues — Allowing an enhanced fee by use of multiplier is a benefit to insured/client — Litigation concerning amount of hours is not compensable — Novelty, complexity and required skill — Case involved somewhat novel legal issues, and time spent by plaintiff’s counsel on legal research was not excessive — Market rate for fees in community — Plaintiff has requested hourly rate which falls within range of hourly fees charged in community by lawyers of reasonable comparable skill, experience and reputation performing similar services as those performed by plaintiff’s counsel — While amount involved was small, amount was substantial to plaintiff who was involved in year long dispute over damaged truck that was vital to her business and had to experience having her claims denied by her insurance company — Results obtained, including vindication that insurance company was wrong and settlement, were excellent — Contingent risk multiplier — Application of contingency risk multiplier to lodestar is within sound discretion of court and is appropriate — Plaintiff was not obligated to pay any fee absent a court award, and it would have been difficult if not impossible for plaintiff to get proper legal representation on facts of case without use of contingency contract and possibility of fee multipliers — Attorneys of skill and reputation similar to plaintiff’s counsel are not eager to pursue and will not accept contested insurance cases with voided policies and go to trial without possibility of multiplier — Contingency risk multiplier is appropriate where success at outset was unlikely — Fact that insurer chose to settle after suit cannot now support position that risk to plaintiff was not great at outset — Expert witness fees — Plaintiff entitled to expert witness fee where expert witness expected to be paid for his time in preparing and testifying in fee hearing — Prejudgment interest — Plaintiff entitled to prejudgment interest on attorney’s fees and costs from date of resolution of case — Prejudgment interest on attorney’s fees and costs shall accrue at rate of 10% from date on which coverage was resolved by entry of judgment and date plaintiff obtained settlement — Attorney’s fees and interest will be awarded in merged total with post-judgment interest then accruing on merged total

6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 512c

Insurance — Attorney’s fees — Amount

6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 113e

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Error to enter summary judgment in favor of insurer in action brought by vehicle passenger on ground that passenger failed to submit to sworn statement prior to filing suit where there was factual issue as to whether passenger was informed of alleged requirement contained in automobile owner’s PIP policy

6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 753e

NOT FINAL VERSION OF OPINION
Subsequent Changes at 7 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 239i

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Once made, an assignment of insured’s interest in PIP benefits to a medical provider is irrevocable — Although mutual revocations of assignments authorized by the assignment itself and/or subject insurance policies have been recognized, unilateral revocations of assignment in instant case were invalid

6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 114a

Insurance — Personal injury protection — Error to grant summary judgment in favor of medical services provider in action to collect benefits which insurer had paid directly to its insured after it received provider’s bill where there was disputed issue of material fact as to whether insurer received only an unsigned billing form or whether it also received assignment of benefits form