STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, PETITIONER,
v.
REMBRANDT MOBILE DIAGNOSTICS, INC. A/A/O NERECE FRANCOIS, RESPONDENT
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.
State Farm petitioned for second-tier certiorari challenging a circuit court's denial of appellate costs and attorney's fees under Florida's proposal for settlement statute (§ 768.79). The court held that the statute's plain language mandates recovery of costs and fees incurred on appeal when the conditions are met, rejecting the lower court's reasoning that appellate success must constitute a money judgment.
Yes. The proposal for settlement statute's plain and mandatory language encompasses all costs and attorney's fees incurred leading up to a final judgment, including those incurred on appeal. A successful appellate reversal satisfies the statutory conditions for cost and fee recovery if the ultimate judgment (after remand) satisfies the statute's requirements.
[1] A party is entitled to recover appellate costs and attorney's fees under the proposal for settlement statute when the statute's conditions are met, even if the appellate…
[2] The proposal for settlement statute applies to costs and attorney's fees incurred on appeal.
Previewing 2 of 3 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 plain and mandatory terms of the proposal for settlement statute encompass all costs and attorney's fees incurred leading up to a final judgment.”
Establishes the broad scope of the statute covering all costs and fees through the judgment process
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceState Farm filed an offer of judgment in a civil action for damages. The respondent did not accept the offer within 30 days. On appeal before the circ…
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 Offer Of Judgment Statute cases and more on FLexlaw
In this petition for second-tier certiorari, the petitioner argues that the circuit court, in its appellate capacity, departed from the essential requirements of the law in denying the petitioner’s motion for entitlement to recover a conditional award of appellate costs and attorney’s fees under the proposal for settlement statute, section 768.79, Florida Statutes (2011). We agree and grant the petition.
In the appellate proceedings before the circuit court, the respondent conceded that the court should grant the motion. The coui't, however, concluded that the petitioner was not entitled to recover its appellate costs and attorney’s fees because the petitioner’s success in obtaining a reversal of the county court order on appeal was not itself a money judgment.
The instant petition followed. The respondent concedes in this court that the circuit court’s conclusion departed from the essential requirements of the law. We agree. The plain and mandatory terms of the proposal for settlement statute encompass all costs and attorney’s fees incurred leading up to a final judgment. The statute provides, in pertinent part:
In any civil action for damages filed in the courts of this state, if a defendant files an offer of judgment which is not accepted by the plaintiff within 30 days, the defendant shall be entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney’s fees incurred by her or him ... if the judgment is one of no liability or the judgment obtained by the plaintiff is at least 25 percent less than such offer, and the court shall set off such costs and attorney’s fees against the award.
§ 768.79(1), Fla. Stat. (2011) (emphasis added). See also Hotter Roofing, Inc. v. Leibowitz, 883 So.2d 788, 789 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (“This Court, along with all district courts in Florida, has ruled that Section 768.79 also applies to fees incurred on appeal.... Thus, the circuit court, sitting in its appellate capacity, departed from the essential requirements of law by denying the petitioner’s request for appellate attorney’s fees.”) (internal citations omitted).
Accordingly, we grant the petition and quash the circuit court’s order denying the petitioner’s motion for entitlement to recover a conditional award of appellate costs and attorney’s fees under the proposal for settlement statute. If the proposal for settlement statute ultimately is satisfied, then the petitioner shall be entitled to recover its appellate costs and attorney’s fees. We direct the circuit court to enter an order on the petitioner’s motion consistent with this opinion.
Petition granted.
POLEN, HAZOURI and GERBER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
United Auto. Ins. Co. v. Comprehensive Health Ctr., 173 So. 3d 1061 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)…e plain and mandatory terms of the proposal for settlement statute encompass all costs and attorney’s fees incurred leading up to a final judgment,” including fees incurred on appeal. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Rembrandt Mobile Diagnostics, Inc., 93 So. 3d 1161, 1162 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); accord Motter Roofing, Inc. v. Leibowitz, 833 So. 2d 788, 789 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (“This Court, along with all district courts in Florida, has ruled that Section 768.79 also applies to fees incurred on appeal.... Thus, the…
-
Superior Auto Glass of Tampa BAY, Inc. v. Gov't Emps. Ins. Co. (Fla. 2d DCA 2021)…award of appellate fees, conditioned upon meeting the terms of the offer of judgment statute . . . is a departure from the essential requirements of the law." (emphasis added) (citing State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Rembrandt Mobile Diagnostics, Inc., 93 So. 3d 1161, 1161 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012))). Thus, we quash the portion of the circuit court's order conditionally granting GEICO's motion for attorney's fees and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. Petition granted in part and denied in p…
-
Fla. Wellness & Rehab. Ctr., Inc. v. Mark J. Feldman, P.A. (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)…award of appellate fees, conditioned upon meeting the terms of the offer of judgment statute, . . . is a departure from the essential requirements of the law.” Id at 1069-70; see also State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Rembrandt Mobile Diagnostics, Inc., 93 So. 3d 1161, 1162 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012) (holding that “the circuit court, in its appellate capacity, departed from the essential requirements of the law in denying the petitioner's motion for entitlement to recover a conditional award of appellate costs and attor…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence