Justia Florida Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Since 2004, Petitioner had initiated forty-three cases other than the instant case that had been denied, transferred, or dismissed. In this case, Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition but expressly retained jurisdiction to pursue possible sanctions against Petitioner based upon the number of her meritless and inappropriate filings. Petitioner was directed to show cause why she should not be barred from filing in the Supreme Court any future pro se pleadings, motions, or other requests for relief. Petitioner did not respond to the order, and the Court imposed such sanctions. View "Lomax v. Taylor" on Justia Law

Plaintiff-corporation filed a lawsuit against Defendant-insurer for personal injury protection benefits. The parties settled the case, and the trial court entered an order of dismissal with prejudice. After the attorney for Plaintiff learned of the dismissal order, he moved to vacate the order of dismissal based on excusable neglect so that he could file his motion for attorney’s fees. The county court vacated the initial dismissal, but the circuit court reversed and reinstated the order of dismissal. Plaintiff filed a petition for common law certiorari. The Fourth District Court of Appeal granted the petition and quashed the decision of the circuit court. Plaintiff subsequently filed a motion for attorney’s fees. The Fourth District denied the motion on the basis of the Supreme Court’s holding in Stockman v. Downs, concluding that because Plaintiff did not request fees in the petition or reply, the motion was untimely. The Supreme Court quashed the decision below to the extent it held that, pursuant to Stockman, a request for attorney’s fees in Fla. R. App. P. 9.100 original proceedings must be made in the petition, a response, or a reply. Remanded. View "Advanced Chiropractic & Rehab. Ctr. v. United Auto. Ins. Co." on Justia Law