• 0,99 €

Beschreibung des Verlags

The petitioner, who was the successful plaintiff in the county court in an action on a PIP policy, seeks certiorari review of an order of the appellate division of the circuit court which, by clerks order, denied him appellate attorneys fees even though it simultaneously per curiam affirmed the money judgment on appeal. Because this order is directly contrary to the mandatory, non-discretionary requirements of law as required by section627.428, Florida Statutes, we grant the petition and quash the order below. See Comprehensive Health Ctr., LLC v. United Auto. Ins. Co., ___ So. 3d ____ (Fla. 3d DCA Case no. 3D10-1705, opinion filed, July 20, 2011) [36 Fla. L. Weekly D1553] (granting certiorari to review of circuit court appellate division denial of appellate section 627.428 attorneys fees); S. Fla. Pain & Rehab. Ctr., Inc. v. United Auto. Ins. Co., ___ So. 3d ____ (Fla. 4th DCA Case no. 4D10-16-6, opinion filed, May 11, 2011) [36 Fla. L. Weekly D994] (same); Hollywood Injury Rehab Ctr. v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 985 So. 2d 1221 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (same); Profl Med. Grp., Inc. v. United Auto. Ins. Co., 967 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (same). But see Highwoods DLF Eola, LLC v. Condo Developer, LLC, 51 So. 3d 570, 573 n.1 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (indicating that appeal may be appropriate to review initial decision of appellate court on collateral issue).

Gewerbe und Technik
17. August
LawApp Publishers

Mehr Bücher von Supreme Court of Illinois