GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, PETITIONER,
v.
KELLY PATON, 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.
The court held that a party seeking discovery of an opponent's attorney's billing records must demonstrate relevance, need, and inability to obtain equivalent material elsewhere.
Geico petitioned for certiorari after the trial court allowed discovery of its attorney's billing records, sought by the respondent to support her cla…
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 Relevance cases and more on FLexlaw
Geico General Insurance Company petitions for a writ of certiorari from two trial court orders that permit discovery of its attorney’s billing records. The records were sought by the respondent in support of her claim for attorney’s fees in the litigation below. We grant the petition because the respondent failed to make the showing required to obtain her opponent’s attorney’s fee records.
This case is controlled by Estilien v. Dyda, 93 So.3d 1186 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). That case took the view that “the records of one’s opponent are, at best, only marginally relevant to the general issue of determining an appropriate amount of attorney’s fees to be awarded in a given case.” Id. at 1188 (quoting HCA Health Srvcs. of Fla., Inc. v. Hillman, 870 So.2d 104 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)). Estilien held that:
[W]here the billing records of opposing counsel are sought solely for the purpose of supporting a claim for attorney’s fees, ‘[t]he party seeking production must establish that the requested material is actually relevant to a disputed issue, that the records sought are needed to prepare for the attorney’s fee hearing, and that substantially equivalent material cannot be obtained from another source.’
93 So.3d at 1188-89 (quoting Hillman, 870 So.2d at 107). Respondent requested the discovery, in part, to support the award of a “multiplier.” She failed to make the showing required by Estilien.
Petition for writ of certiorari granted; orders under review quashed.
DAMOORGIAN, C.J., STEVENSON, and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Paton v. GEICO Gen. Ins. Co., 190 So. 3d 1047 (Fla. 2016)…LEWIS, J. Kelly Patón seeks review of the decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in GEICO General Insurance Co. v. Paton (Paton II), 133 So. 3d 1071 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014), on the ground that it expressly and directly conflicts with the decision of this Court in State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Palma, 555 So. 2d 836 (Fla.1990), on a question of law. We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla…
Authorities Cited
- HCA Health Servs. OF Fla., Inc. v. Hillman, 870 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- Balande Estilien v. Dyda, 93 So. 3d 1186 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)