10 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 114a
Insurance — Personal injury protection — Where underlying issues in PIP case have been resolved, proposal for settlement for attorney’s fees and costs only is improper — Proposal stricken
HEATHER BEKIUS, Plaintiff, vs. DIRECT GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. County Court, 9th Judicial Circuit in and for Orange County. Case No. SCO 02-392. December 27, 2002. C. Jeffery Arnold, Judge. Counsel: Thomas Andrew Player, Weiss Legal Group, P.A., Maitland, for Plaintiff. Louis Kaye, for Defendant.
ORDER STRIKING DEFENDANT’S PROPOSAL FOR SETTLEMENT
This matter came before the Court on December 11, 2002, on Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Defendant’s Proposal for Settlement. Having heard argument of counsel for both parties the court finds that:
1. Plaintiff, Heather Bekius, filed a complaint to recover personal injury protection (PIP) benefits from Defendant, Direct General Insurance Company. This claim was based on a contract of insurance providing such benefits as a result of injuries sustained by Ms. Bekius in a motor vehicle accident.
2. On February 20, 2002, Defendant confessed judgment by paying the personal injury protection benefits at issue in this action.
3. Following the confession of judgment Defendant admitted and agreed to Plaintiff’s entitlement to attorney fees and costs.
4. On October 22, 2002, Defendant filed a Proposal for Settlement pursuant to Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.442 and Florida Statute §768.79.
5. Defendant’s Proposal for Settlement expressly states that it is in “resolution of outstanding attorney’s fees.” Attorney fees and costs are the only remaining issues in this case.
6. It is improper for a Defendant in a PIP case where the underlying issues have been resolved to file a Proposal for Settlement for attorney’s fees and costs only. See Glanzberg v. Kauffman, 771 So. 2d 60 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) and Natale v. Allstate Indemnity Company (Brevard County Court, 18th Judicial Circuit, Case No. 20422-CC-4, September 1, 1999) [6 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 797a].
7. Pursuant to the authority of Moakley v. Smallwood, 27 Fla. L. Weekly S175 (Fla. 2001), Plaintiff has requested attorney fees for the time expended in bringing this motion;
Therefore, in consideration of all of the foregoing:
IT IS ADJUDGED that:
1. Defendant’s Proposal for Settlement is hereby stricken.
2. Plaintiff’s counsel may amend his affidavit of attorney fees to include the time associated with this motion, and may present this time for consideration by the court at the pending hearing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Tax Attorney Fees and Costs.
* * *