ANGELINA LOSICCO, APPELLANT,
v.
THE AETNA CASUALTY AND SURETY COMPANY, AND BRASTILE, INC., APPELLEES
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.
The court held that a trial court cannot deny attorney's fees to a prevailing plaintiff when an insurer settles a disputed claim after a lawsuit is filed.
Appellant sued an insurer, Aetna Casualty, which settled the lawsuit to recover medical payments. The trial court denied appellant's request for attor…
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 Insurer'S Duty To Defend cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Angelina Losicco, appeals the denial of attorney’s fees where appellee, Aetna Casualty, an insurer, settled a lawsuit to recover medical payments. We reverse and remand.
When an insurance company has agreed to settle a disputed case, it has in effect, declined to defend its position in the pending suit. Thus, payment of the claim is, indeed, the functional equivalent of a confession of judgment or a verdict in favor of the insured. Amador v. Latin American Property & Casualty Insurance Company, 552 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); see also Wollard v. Lloyd’s & Companies of Lloyd’s, 439 So. 2d 217 (Fla. 1983).
The trial court has no discretion to deny a reasonable attorney’s fee to the prevailing plaintiff where the insurance company first disputes the claim and then settles the case after a lawsuit is filed. Amador v. Latin American Property & Casualty Insurance Company, 552 So. 2d at 1133.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a determination of the attorney’s fees.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
O.A.G. Corp. v. Britamco Underwriters, Inc., 707 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…Brito, 522 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). Avila v. Latin American Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 548 So. 2d 894, 894-95 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). See U.S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Rosado, 606 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Losicco v. Aetna Cas. and Sur. Co., 588 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Hopkins v. The Vizcayans, 582 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 592 So. 2d 683 (Fla.1991). The Wollard doctrine does not apply because Bri-tameo did not decline to defend its position regarding coverage — it has not offere…
-
Fouts v. Bowling, 596 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…Fla.4th DCA 1982)); see also Lombard v. Executive Elevator Serv., 545 [*96] So. 2d 453 (Fla.3d DCA 1989). We therefore reverse the final judgment.2 Reversed and remanded. . Plaintiff did not agree to or invite this procedure. See Whitney v. Brown, 588 So. 2d 681 (Fla.3d DCA 1991); White v. Soni, 550 So. 2d 75 (Fla.3d DCA 1989). . If this cause survives a proper summary judgment motion, Fouts will be entitled to a jury trial. See Chauffeurs, Teamsters and Helpers, Local No. 391 v. Terry, 494 U.S. 558, 563-5…
-
Romero v. Progressive Se. Ins. Co., 629 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…the class of persons entitled to claim fees under section 627.428, Florida Statutes (1991), we do not remand for an evidentiary hearing as to whether or not the functional equivalent of a confession of judgment, Losicco v. Aetna Casualty & Sur. Co., 588 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), has indeed taken place. The court below did not hear evidence regarding whether there was a confession of judgment, Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Palmer, 297 So. 2d 96, 99 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974), or whether the insurer paid, not to settle…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wollard v. Lloyd's & Cos. OF Lloyd's, 439 So. 2d 217 (Fla. 1983)
- Amador v. Latin Am. Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 552 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)