You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Lawyers Title Insurance Corp. v. Reitzes

Citations: 631 So. 2d 1101; 1994 WL 6722Docket: No. 92-1638

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; January 11, 1994; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

Appellant's response to the order to show cause regarding potential sanctions was filed on December 6, 1993. The court found that the response failed to address the inquiry satisfactorily. The appellant continued to argue that its motion for rehearing was appropriate and did not violate Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330(a), which prohibits rearguing the merits. The court had previously rejected this argument in its November 17, 1993, opinion. As a consequence of this violation, the court imposed a fine of $1,250, to be paid within 30 days. The fine is to be equally divided between Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation and the appellant’s counsel, McDermott, Will & Emery. Judges Gunther and Farmer concurred with this decision.

Legal Issues Addressed

Imposition of Fines for Procedural Violations

Application: A fine was levied against the appellant and their counsel for failing to adequately respond to the court's inquiry regarding the filing of a motion for rehearing.

Reasoning: As a consequence of this violation, the court imposed a fine of $1,250, to be paid within 30 days.

Joint Liability for Sanctions

Application: The court's fine was divided equally between Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation and the appellant’s counsel, indicating shared responsibility for the violation.

Reasoning: The fine is to be equally divided between Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation and the appellant’s counsel, McDermott, Will & Emery.

Sanctions for Violation of Appellate Procedure

Application: The court imposed a monetary sanction on the appellant for filing a motion that violated Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330(a), which prohibits rearguing the merits of a case.

Reasoning: The appellant continued to argue that its motion for rehearing was appropriate and did not violate Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330(a), which prohibits rearguing the merits.