IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CURCUIT
IN AND
APPELLATE DIVISION
CHIROMED CHIROPRACTIC CENTER, INC.,
Appellant, Circuit Appeal:
UNC: 522003AP005022XXXXCV
vs. Ref: 03-5022AP-88B
ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, County Court:
Appellee. UNC: 522001CC006442XXCOCO
Ref: 01-6442-CO-40
____________________________________/
Opinion filed________________________
Appeal from Final Judgment
Judge Henry J. Andringa
Brenda A. Baietto, Esquire
Attorney for Appellant
Charles W. Hall, Esquire
Attorney for Appellee
ORDER AND OPINION
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on appeal, filed by Chiromed Chiropractic Center, Inc. (Chiromed), from the Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees, entered June 9, 2003, in favor of Allstate Insurance Company (Allstate). Upon review of the briefs, the record and being otherwise fully advised, the Court affirms the Order.
The underlying proceedings began when Chiromed sued Allstate for unpaid medical benefits, interest and attorney fees. Allstate paid the overdue benefits plus interest but did not pay attorney fees. Allstate litigated the attorney’s fees issue and eventually settled with Plaintiff for attorney’s fees that did not include fees for time spent litigating over the amount for attorney’s fees. Thereafter, Plaintiff filed a Motion requesting an award of attorney’s fees for having to litigate over the amount of attorney’s fees. The trial court denied Plaintiff’s Motion.
The Plaintiff raises two issues on appeal: (1) whether the trial court erred when it declined to award attorney’s fee for time spent litigating the amount of attorney’s fees; and, (2) whether the issue in this case, fees for fees, should be certified to the Second District as a matter of great public importance.
The Court finds that the law is well settled with regard to the issues
in this case. As to the first issue,
the trial court correctly ruled that Plaintiff was not entitled to attorney’s
fees for litigating the amount of fees. In
State farm Fire & Casualty Co. v. Palma, 629 So.2d 830, 833 (Fla.
1993), the Florida Supreme Court held that pursuant to the plain language
of Section 627.428, attorney’s fees may not be awarded for time spent litigating
the amount of attorney’s fees, though it may be properly awarded for litigating
the issue of entitlement to attorney’s fees.
The Plaintiff argued that the fees should be awarded because it will
directly benefit the insured by releasing its obligation for the unpaid fees. However, in Mediplex Const. of
With regard to the second issue, the Court declines to certify the issue about fees for fees to the Second District Court of Appeals. Only the County Court has jurisdiction to certify a matter of great public importance to the Second District. See Fla. R. App. P. Rule 9.030(b)(4)(A), see also Star Casualty v. U.S.A. Diagnostics, Inc, 855 so.2d 251, 252 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) ( stating that “the district court of appeal has discretionary jurisdiction to accept jurisdiction of appeals from final judgments of the county court in which the county court certifies a question of great public importance.”)
Therefore, it is,
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Order Denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees is affirmed.
DONE AND ORDERED in chambers, at
__________________________
DAVID A. DEMERS
Circuit Judge, Appellate Division
Copies furnished to:
Judge Henry J. Andringa
Brenda A. Baietto, Esquire
Charles W. Hall, Esquire
501
Post Office Box 210