Abbey Adams Logo

Defending Liability, Workers' Compensation, Employment Claims and Appeals Since 1982

  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

  • Bloglovin
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Phone
  • Home
  • Locations
    • Where We Practice in Florida
    • Where We Practice In Illinois
  • Practices
  • Attorneys
    • David J. Abbey
    • Jeffrey M. Adams
    • Bruce D. Burk
    • Robert P. Byelick
    • Jaime Eagan
    • Jennifer J. Kennedy
    • John D. Kiernan (1947-2016)
    • V. Joseph Mueller
    • Steven A. Ochsner
    • Alexis C. Upton
  • Blog
  • Links
  • Contact Us

May 13, 2016 by admin

Insurance — Automobile liability — Attorney’s fees and costs — Policy provision stating that insurer would cover “other expenses incurred at our request” included costs associated with choosing to litigate a case instead of settling it — Conflict certified

41 Fla. L. Weekly D1114bTop of Form

Insurance
— Automobile liability — Attorney’s fees and costs — Trial court properly
awarded attorney’s fees and costs against insurer jointly and severally with
insured pursuant to plaintiff’s proposal for settlement — Policy provision
stating that insurer would cover “other expenses incurred at our request”
included costs associated with choosing to litigate a case instead of settling
it — Conflict certified

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. ALYSIA
M. MACEDO AND ZACKERY R. LOMBARDO, Appellees. 1st District. Case No. 1D15-2896.
Opinion filed May 6, 2016. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa
County. William F. Stone, Judge. Counsel: B. Richard Young and Courtney F.
Smith of Young, Bill, Roumbos & Boles, P.A., Pensacola, for Appellant.
Elizabeth Monro of Florida Vanguard Attorneys LLC, Tampa, for Appellee Zackery
R. Lombardo; David A. Simpson, Jonathan D. Simpson of The Simpson Law Firm,
Fort Walton Beach, for Appellee Alysia M. Macedo.

(PER CURIAM.) The Government Employees Insurance Company
(GEICO) challenges the final judgment in an automobile insurance case holding
it liable to pay Alysia M. Macedo’s attorneys fees and costs after GEICO had
rejected, on behalf of its insured Zackery R. Lombardo, a $50,000 settlement
proposal made by Ms. Macedo pursuant to section 768.79, Florida Statutes. A
jury returned a verdict in Ms. Macedo’s favor, awarding more than four times
the amount of the proposal. Ms. Macedo then joined GEICO to the judgment, see
§ 627.4136(4), Fla. Stat., and sought taxable fees and costs pursuant to
section 768.79, which the trial court awarded against GEICO jointly and
severally with its insured.

We now affirm the trial court’s judgment based on our prior
decision in New Hampshire Indemnity Company v. Gray, 177 So. 3d 56 (Fla.
1st DCA 2015). In Gray, this Court found that the insurer’s policy
provision stating that it would cover “other reasonable expenses incurred at
our request” included costs associated with choosing to litigate a case instead
of settling it. Id. at 63-64. See also GEICO Gen. Ins. Co. v.
Hollingsworth,
157 So. 3d 365 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) (finding that the trial
court permissibly taxed attorneys’ fees against GEICO based on its policy
provision requiring it to pay legal costs); Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass’n v.
Johnson,
654 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (construing similar policy
language to require the insurer to cover its insured’s litigation costs). As in
Gray, GEICO’s policy with Mr. Lombardo gave it the sole right to
litigate and settle claims, and contractually obligated it to pay for “all
investigative and legal costs incurred by us” and “all reasonable costs
incurred by an insured at our request.” The policy didn’t provide a definition
of legal or other costs, nor exclude, for example, costs and fees awarded to a
plaintiff driver pursuant to the offer of judgment statute. We recognized in Gray
that:

[U]nder
insurance policies such as the one here, insurers enjoy the sole right to
settle or litigate claims against their insureds; therefore, choosing to
litigate is no different than a request . . . to do so. Any such expression, or
request, necessarily encompasses incurring litigation costs, which may mean not
only the insurer’s litigation costs, but also those incurred by the opposing
party should that party prevail. It is the insurer’s choice to litigate — a
decision only it can make — that results in these costs being incurred; thus,
“those expenses [are] incurred at the insurer’s request.”

Gray, 177 So. 3d at 63 (quoting Johnson,
654 So. 2d at 240).

On this basis, we affirm the trial court’s final judgment
adjudicating GEICO jointly and severally liable with its insured for Ms.
Macedo’s taxable fees and costs. As in Gray, we also certify conflict
with Steele v. Kinsey, 801 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 2d DCA
2001).

AFFIRMED; CONFLICT CERTIFIED. (WETHERELL, ROWE, and
OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.)

* *
*

Filed Under: Articles

Primary Sidebar

Blog Archives

  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013

Footer

The materials available at this website are for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. You should contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular issue or problem. Use of and access to this Website or any of the e-mail links contained within the site do not create an attorney-client relationship between Abbey, Adams, Byelick & Mueller, L.L.P. and the user or browser. The opinions expressed at or through this site are the opinions of the individual author and may not reflect the opinions of the firm or any individual attorney. opens in a new windowAbbey, Adams, Byelick, & Mueller XML Sitemap Index

Copyright © 2021 · Abbey Adams Byelick & Mueller, LLP · All Rights Reserved · Defending Liability, Workers' Compensation, Employment Claims and Appeals Since 1982