FOX, GEORGE, LOEFFLER & DOWNEY, P.A., A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION, PLAINTIFF,
v.
UTICA MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT
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 appellate court affirmed the conviction for receiving a stolen boat motor and the sentence for receiving a stolen pistol, finding the evidence sufficient and upholding the denial of a motion for acquittal. The court also addressed issues regarding prosecutorial comments during closing arguments and the validity of a probation condition requiring restitution for unrelated offenses.
A sentencing judge may require a defendant to make restitution to the aggrieved party for the damage or loss caused by the offense for which they were convicted, but cannot require restitution for unrelated offenses as a condition of probation.
The defendant appealed his conviction for buying, receiving, and concealing a stolen boat motor, and also appealed a sentence imposed after pleading n…
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.
BOARDMAN, Chief Judge.
The Honorable John S. Andrews, Circuit Judge of the Sixth Judicial Circuit, has certified the following two questions to this court.
1. MAY AN ATTORNEY BRING AN INDEPENDENT ACTION FOR PAYMENT OF HIS FEES AGAINST AN ADVERSE PARTY IN A PRIOR ACTION WHO HAS MADE SETTLEMENT WITH THE ATTORNEY’S CLIENT, WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE AND CONSENT OF THE ATTORNEY, BUT AFTER THE CLIENT HAS DISCHARGED THE ATTORNEY?
2. IF THE ANSWER TO QUESTION NUMBER 1 IS IN THE AFFIRMATIVE, MAY SUCH AN INDEPENDENT ACTION BE MAINTAINED IN THE ABSENCE OF AN ALLEGATION OF COLLUSION BETWEEN THE ATTORNEY’S CLIENT AND THE ADVERSE PARTY? Our research reveals persuasive authority in Florida which would resolve the issues presented to us, and we therefore decline to answer the certified questions. See Fla.R.App.P. 4.6(a)(b). See Miller v. Scobie, 152 Fla. 328, 11 So. 2d 892 (1943); State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Ganz, 119 So. 2d 319 (Fla.3d DCA 1960).
OTT, J., and McNULTY, JOSEPH P. (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Lenore Miller and Wallace Ruff v. Scobie, 152 Fla. 328 (Fla. 1943)
- State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Ganz, 119 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)