TRAVELERS INDEMNITY COMPANY OF AMERICA, APPELLANT,
v.
JACQUELINE MORRIS, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Travelers Indemnity Company appeals a trial court order awarding additional attorney's fees to an insured's counsel for post-judgment services. The court reverses, holding that Section 627.428 permits attorney's fees only for services involved in obtaining a judgment against an insurer, not for services related to enforcing the judgment or supplementing an appellate record.
The court reversed the fee award, holding that Section 627.428 permits attorney's fees only for services involved in obtaining a judgment against a carrier, not for services required to effect compliance with, collect, or execute upon that judgment. Additionally, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to award fees for services related to the earlier appeal because the appellate court did not remand the issue for determination.
[1] Attorney's fees under Section 627.428, Florida Statutes, are awardable only for services rendered in obtaining a judgment against an insurance carrier, not for services r…
[2] A trial court lacks jurisdiction to award attorney's fees for services related to an appeal when the appellate court has not remanded the issue to the lower tribunal.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the clear terms of Sec. 627.428-which must, in any event, be strictly construed, Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Smith, 366 So.2d 456 (Fla.4th DCA 1978)-permit fees only for services involved in obtaining a judgment against a carrier, and not for those required to effect compliance with, collection of, or execution upon that judgment.”
Establishes the scope of attorney's fees recoverable under the statute—limited to obtaining the judgment, not enforcing it.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1977, the plaintiff-appellee obtained a judgment against Travelers on a personal injury protection insurance claim, and the trial court awarded att…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Attorney'S Fees Under Fla. Stat. § 627.428 cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Judge.
In 1977, the plaintiff-appellee secured a judgment against the appellant, Travelers, on a personal injury protection insurance claim. The trial court also awarded the plaintiff attorney’s fees under Section 627.-428, Florida Statutes (1977). The judgment and fee award were affirmed by this court, which also granted fees for the appellate services of the insured’s counsel. Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Morris, 360 So. 2d 1262 (Fla.3d DCA 1978). Subsequently, the trial court entered the order now under review,1 awarding $2,500 for additional post-judgment services rendered by the appellee’s lawyer in the trial court. We reverse.
The present fee represents payment for counsel’s efforts in (a) securing payment of the p. i. p. benefits required by the judgment and (b) settling the record of unreported pre-judgment proceedings for use in the initial appeal. The award was not authorized for either class of services. First, the clear terms of Sec. 627.428-which must, in any event, be strictly construed, Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. v. Smith, 366 So. 2d 456 (Fla.4th DCA 1978)-permit fees only for services involved in obtaining a judgment against a carrier, and not for those required to effect compliance with, collection of, or execution upon that judgment. Lee v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 388 So. 2d 346 (Fla.lst DCA 1980); see, Bohlinger v. Higginbotham, 70 So. 2d 911, 916 (Fla.1954). Second, since we did not remand the issue to the lower tribunal as permitted by Fla.R.App.P. 9.400(b), the trial court lacked jurisdiction to award fees for services related 2 to the earlier appeal.3 See, Winner v. Winner, 376 So. 2d 924 (Fla.3d DCA 1979). The order below is therefore reversed and the cause remanded with directions to deny the appellee’s motion for additional fees.
Reversed.
. Pursuant to Fla.R.App.P. 9.130(a)(4).
. Proceedings, such as those involved here, for the settlement of the contents of an unreported hearing are obviously an integral part of the appellate, rather than the trial process. See, Fla.R.App.P. 9.200(b)(3). •
. It must be conclusively presumed that our own award of appellate fees encompassed all the services relating to the appeal, including those now claimed. For this reason, the nature and extent of the services for which fees are sought should be referred to in the motion for attorney’s fees filed in the court of appeal under Fla.R.App.P. 9.400(b).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pepper's Steel & Alloys, Inc. v. United States, 850 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 2003)…t, the court held that Florida law does not permit Pepper’s Steel to recover fees incurred in enforcing the settlement agreement. Id. Pepper’s Steel appealed. Unable to reconcile conflicting language in Travelers Indemnity Co. of America v. Morris, 390 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), and Bankers Security Insurance Co. v. Brady, 765 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), the Eleventh Circuit asks us to determine whether section 627.428, Florida Statutes, allows an award of attorneys’ fees to an insured who successful…
-
Foley v. The Honorable J. Leonard Fleet, 652 So. 2d 962 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)…is necessary because without authorization from an appellate court, a trial court cannot award attorney’s fees for services rendered on an appeal. Hornsby v. Newman, 444 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) and Travelers Indemnity Co. of America v. Morris, 390 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). [*964] We reverse that portion of the order determining that the former wife is a prevailing party without prejudice to her seeking its reinstatement if she ultimately prevails. DELL, C.J., and STONE, J., concur.…
-
Aksomitas v. Sabitra Maharaj, 771 So. 2d 541 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…ial courts, however, have no authority to award prevailing party attorney’s fees for an appeal unless specifically authorized to do so by the appellate court. Foley v. Fleet, 652 So. 2d 962 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Travelers Indem. Co. of Am. v. Morris, 390 So. 2d 464 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Appellate courts are thus required to rule on motions for prevailing party attorney’s fees without knowing who will ultimately prevail. This court grants those motions contingent on that party prevailing, leaving the determinatio…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Bohlinger v. Higginbotham, 70 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 1954)
- Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Smith, 366 So. 2d 456 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
- Winner v. Winner, 376 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- LEE v. Gov't Emps. Ins. Co., 388 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)