AMERICAN INDEMNITY COMPANY, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
GEORGE COMEAU, 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.
American Indemnity Company appealed a trial court judgment confirming an arbitration award in an uninsured motorist coverage dispute, challenging the award of costs totaling $1,047.50. The court affirmed the cost award as a whole but reversed and remanded regarding a $875 expert witness fee that was awarded without proper evidentiary hearing.
Costs may always be taxed by the trial court against an insurance company in uninsured motorist arbitration, and policy provisions attempting to limit cost awards are void as attempts to reduce statutory coverage. The trial court properly awarded costs under section 682.15 through a motion to tax costs rather than requiring modification of the award. However, expert witness fees cannot be awarded without evidentiary hearing when objected to; the prevailing party must present testimony concerning necessity and reasonableness.
[1] Provisions in uninsured motorist coverage insurance policies attempting to limit or subtract from statutory coverage are void.
[2] Costs may be taxed by the court against an insurance company in arbitration concerning uninsured motorist coverage, notwithstanding policy provisions to the contrary.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Costs may always be taxed by the court against an insurance company in arbitration concerning uninsured motorist coverage. Since statutorily mandated uninsured motorist coverage is statutorily described, to the extent that any insurance policy provision attempts to limit or substract from statutory coverage, such provision is void.”
Establishes that policy provisions limiting cost awards in uninsured motorist arbitration are void as contrary to statutory mandates.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceComeau, the insured, brought suit against American Indemnity Company on uninsured motorist coverage. The insurance company invoked an arbitration clau…
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 Motion To Tax Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
COWART, Judge.
In a suit by the appellee insured on uninsured motorist coverage, appellant insurance company invoked an arbitration clause in the policy. The arbitrators awarded the insured damages. The trial court confirmed the award and entered final judgment for damages plus $1,047.50 costs. The insurance company appeals the cost award, contending that a provision of the insurance policy arbitration clause that “each party will pay the expenses it incurs, and bear the expenses of the third arbitrator equally” amounts to the arbitration agreement’s “providing otherwise” within the meaning of section 682.11, Florida Statutes (1982):
Unless otherwise provided in the agreement or provision for arbitration, the arbitrators’ and umpires’ expenses and fees, together with other expenses, not including counsel fees, incurred in the conduct of the arbitration, shall be paid as provided in the award.
We cannot agree with appellant. Costs may always be taxed by the court against an insurance company in arbitration concerning uninsured motorist coverage. Since statutorily mandated uninsured mo torist coverage is statutorily described, to the extent that any insurance policy provision attempts to limit or substract from statutory coverage, such provision is void.1 Therefore, a provision in any arbitration clause of an insurance policy providing uninsured motorist coverage requiring each party to bear his own costs is an invalid attempt to reduce statutory coverage.2
Appellant also contends that, since costs were not “provided in the award,” the trial court could not award costs except by a timely petition to modify the arbitration award under section 682.14, Florida Statute (1982). The cases3 cited by appellant hold that only where a party seeks an award of arbitrator’s fees, the award of such fees must be made in the award itself or after a timely petition to modify the award.
Section 682.15, Florida Statutes (1982), provides in part:
Costs of the application [for arbitration] and of the proceedings subsequent thereto, and disbursements may be awarded by the court, (emphasis added)
The insured was entitled to an award of fees and properly sought them procedurally by a motion to tax costs.
Appellant also argues that the award of costs erroneously includes an award of $875 as an expert witness fee to Dr. Newfield which was made without evidence or stipulation as to the reasonableness of that amount.4 If no specific objection to the setting of an expert witness fee without an evidentiary hearing is made, the trial judge has the authority to set the amount of the expert witness fee based upon his experience in those matters together with his observation of the witness’ testimony or his review of the record. Where objection has been made, as in the instant case, the prevailing party must present testimony concerning the necessity and reasonableness of the fee. Lafferty v. Lafferty, 413 So. 2d 170, 171 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982).
Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed except as to the award of the expert witness fee, which item is stricken from the cost judgment, and the cause is remanded with directions to the trial court to give appellee an evidentiary hearing and both parties an opportunity to present evidence as to the reasonableness of that item.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part.
COBB and FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., JJ., concur. . See Mullis v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 252 So. 2d 229 (Fla.1971); Reeves v. Miller, 418 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Harbach v. New Hampshire Ins. Group, 413 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).
. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Rutkin, 199 So. 2d 705 (Fla.1967); Lumbermen’s Mut. Cas. Co. v. Meade, 404 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Fidelity & Cas. Co. of New York v. DeJesus, 402 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Eagle Star Ins. Co. v. Parker, 365 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); McNair v. Continental Ins. Co., 245 So. 2d 634 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971); Carter v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 224 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969).
. Rutkin v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 195 So. 2d 221 (Fla.App.); Lumbermen’s Mut. Cas. Co. v. Meade, 404 So. 2d at 1143.
. See Neimark v. Abramson, 403 So. 2d 1057 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Cohen v. Cohen, 400 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981); Boyette v. Carden, 347 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
United Servs. Auto. Ass'n v. Guy E. Smith and his wife, 527 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…ade, however, we agree with the trial court here that the Smiths are entitled to recover the $1800.00 arbitration fee. We are persuaded by the reasoning of the Fifth District Court of Appeal’s subsequent decision in American Indemnity Co. v. Comean, 419 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), that to require the Smiths to pay $1800.00 would reduce their benefits under their insurance policy, and would violate public policy by treating them differently than had the offending motorist maintained adequate insurance. The…
-
Daignault v. Allstate Ins. Co., 484 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)…osts in pursuing the arbitration claim. See State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Rutkin, 199 So. 2d 705 (Fla.1967); Bennett v. Florida Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance Co., 477 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); American Indemnity Co. v. Comeau, 419 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). While we recognize there is some possibility that appellant will not benefit from an award for future medical expense because such award may go to another insurer, we are inclined to grant the requested relief. The order is reve…
-
Powell v. Barnes, 629 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…tion to the setting of an expert witness fee without an evidentiary hearing (as in the instant case), the prevailing party will have to present testimony concerning the necessity and reasonableness of the fee. See also American Indem. Co. v. Comeau, 419 So. 2d 670, 672 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). Here, the [*186] prevailing plaintiffs, Barnes, sought to meet their burden at the evidentiary hearing by relying solely upon one “omnibus” witness, an experienced trial attorney, who was not shown to have expertise (ie., t…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (14 total)
- Mullis v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 252 So. 2d 229 (Fla. 1971)
- Jules J. Cohen v. Rosalyn L. Cohen, 400 So. 2d 463 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)
- Lafferty v. Lafferty, 413 So. 2d 170 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Rutkin, 199 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 1967)
- Walker v. Buckeye Cellulose Corp., 195 So. 2d 221 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967)
- King S. Carter et ux. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 224 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969)
- Eagle Star Ins. Co. v. Nannette Parker and Melvin Parker, 365 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)
- Harbach v. NEW Hampshire Ins. Grp., 413 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Boyette v. Carden, 347 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
- Neimark v. John H. Abramson & Lani Abramson, 403 So. 2d 1057 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)