DARRYL SCHNEIDER, APPELLANT,

v.

THE UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND LISA M. OKOH, ESQUIRE, APPELLEES

Citator

Cited By

• Progressive Express Ins. Co. v. Physician's Injury Care Ctr., Inc., 906 So. 2d 1125 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)
  …er section 627.428 for litigating the issue of entitlement to attorney’s fees, the statute does not authorize an award of fees for litigating the amount of the fees to be awarded. Subsequently, this court held in Allstate Indemnity Company v. Hicks, 880 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), review dismissed, SC 04-1791, 901 So. 2d 120 (Fla. Apr. 1, 2005), that time spent litigating the propriety of a fee multiplier concerns only the amount of the fee to be awarded, and not the matter of entitlement. The applicabili…
• Mercury Cas. Co. v. Flores, 905 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
  …the Florida Supreme Court by virtue of the certified questions in this case. We note the objection. The plaintiff has requested appellate attorney’s fees for this appeal. We deny appellate attorney’s fees and follow Allstate Indemnity Co. v. Hicks, 880 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), review pending, Fla. S.Ct. Case No. SC04-1791. See also Bluegrass Art Cast, Inc. v. Consolidated Erection Servs., Inc., 870 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). The Fifth District explained: In State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Palm…
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Trevino, 904 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
  …s rendered in procuring full payment of the judgment” for which fees are recoverable against the insurer. Palma, 629 So. 2d at 833. In reaching this conclusion, we follow the recent decision of the Fifth District in Allstate Indemnity Co. v. Hicks, 880 So. 2d 772, 774 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004),3 which held: We conclude that time spent litigating the appropriateness of a fee multiplier goes to amount, and as a result, is not recoverable under Palma. The use of a multiplier presupposes the entitlement to an attorne…