48 Fla. L. Weekly D135a MSP RECOVERY CLAIMS, SERIES LLC, et al., Appellants, v. COLOPLAST CORP., et al., Appellees. 3rd District. Case No. 3D22-191. L.T. Case No. 18-30920. January 11, 2023. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Mark Blumstein, Judge. Counsel: MSP Recovery Law Firm, Robert Strongarone, Aida M. Landa, and Janpaul Read More »
Articles
Attorney’s fees — Insurance — Homeowners — Trial court erred in awarding attorney’s fees incurred by insured in its action against insurer — Because there was no prior dispute as to amount owed, lawsuit was not a necessary catalyst to recovery — Further, dispute between parties did not showcase “a breakdown in the claims-adjusting process” because insurer was never informed of potential dispute until suit was filed — Fact that insurer did not seek to compel appraisal until after suit was filed not basis for awarding attorney’s fees to insured where first indication of disagreement was insured’s complaint — Partial denial of claim did not entitle insured to file suit immediately
48 Fla. L. Weekly D120b PEOPLE’S TRUST INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. ERROL A. POLANCO, Appellee. 4th District. Case No. 4D22-559. January 11, 2023. Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Michael A. Robinson, Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE20-9475. Counsel: Mark T. Tinker of Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., Tampa, and Read More »
Insurance — Attorney’s fees — Prevailing party — Confession of judgment — Post-suit payment of claim — Surplus lines insurer — Trial court erred in denying insureds’ motion for attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to section 626.9373 where lawsuit was necessary catalyst to resolve claim and force insurer to proceed with appraisal process
48 Fla. L. Weekly D131a YOSEF DEITSCH, et al., Appellants, v. CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYDS OF LONDON, Appellee. 3rd District. Case No. 3D22-128. L.T. Case No. 20-16057. January 11, 2023. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Vivianne Del Rio, Judge. Counsel: Litigation & Recovery Law Center, PL, and Alex Stern, for appellants. Read More »
Contracts — Attorney’s fees — Retainer agreement — Trial court erred in awarding plaintiff law firm attorney’s fees for first six months of representation where retainer agreement unambiguously provided for a flat fee of $500 per month for first six months of representation which was to be charged against initial $3,000 retainer fee paid by clients, and further provided that “when” initial retainer was depleted, an additional retainer might be required and the client would be billed on an hourly basis for work performed — Expert evidence — Law firm was not required to present independent expert testimony to corroborate reasonableness of fees billed after the first six months where it was seeking to recover previously incurred attorney’s fees as an element of compensatory damages in a breach of contract action against its client
48 Fla. L. Weekly D117a C. GIOVANNI MUENTES a/k/a CARLOS G. MUENTES and MICHELE RUIZ, Appellants, v. BRUCE S. ROSENWATER & ASSOCIATES, P.A., Appellee. 4th District. Case No. 4D22-356. January 11, 2023. Appeal from the County Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Sarah Shullman, Judge; L.T. Case No. 50-2020-SC-018671-XXXX-MB. Counsel: Thomas J. Read More »
Wrongful death — Premises liability — Independent contractors — Construction accidents — Summary judgment — Evidence — Argument — Action stemming from death of decedent which occurred after decedent fell though skylight of commercial warehouse owned and operated by defendants while working as an HVAC technician for an independent contractor — Trial court erred by entering summary judgment in favor of plaintiff where genuine issues of material fact existed concerning whether defendants knew or should have known that skylights were potentially not up to code based on prior repairs to roof that were done without a permit — Defendants were denied right to fair trial on damages where plaintiff introduced evidence of subsequent remedial measures in violation of motion in limine — Additionally, plaintiff’s counsel made improper comments at closing where counsel asked jury to render their verdict “for the entire community” and mentioned forty-year inspections and building safety in context of another building’s collapse that occurred during the trial
48 Fla. L. Weekly D132b MARTEX CORPORATION, et al., Appellants, v. ROBERTO ARTILES, etc., et al., Appellees. 3rd District. Case No. 3D21-2119. L.T. Case No. 17-3404. January 11, 2023. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose M. Rodriguez, Judge. Counsel: GrayRobinson, P.A., Jack R. Reiter and Jordan S. Kosches, for appellants. Ratzan, Read More »
