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.

YOSEF DEITSCH v. CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYDS OF LONDON

Citation: Not availableDocket: 22-0128

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; January 10, 2023; Florida; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

Yosef and Miriam Deitsch appeal a trial court's order that denied their motion for attorney’s fees and costs under section 626.93731, Florida Statutes, and dismissed their case against Certain Underwriters at Lloyds of London with prejudice. The Third District Court of Appeal, presided over by Judge Gordo, determined that the Deitschs' lawsuit served as a necessary catalyst in compelling Lloyds to engage in the appraisal process to resolve their claim. Citing precedent, the court noted that when a lawsuit is filed to address a legitimate dispute, it can warrant attorney's fees, as established in Lewis v. Universal Prop. Cas. Ins. Co. The court explained that if an insurer pays policy proceeds after a suit is filed but before a judgment is made, this payment functions similarly to a confession of judgment, entitling the insured to attorney's fees. The court reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case for further proceedings.

Legal Issues Addressed

Confession of Judgment Doctrine in Insurance Disputes

Application: If an insurer remits policy proceeds after a lawsuit has been filed but before a judgment is rendered, it is deemed analogous to a confession of judgment, thereby entitling the insured to attorney's fees.

Reasoning: The court explained that if an insurer pays policy proceeds after a suit is filed but before a judgment is made, this payment functions similarly to a confession of judgment, entitling the insured to attorney's fees.

Entitlement to Attorney's Fees under Florida Statute Section 626.93731

Application: The court recognized that the initiation of a lawsuit to address a legitimate insurance claim dispute may justify an award of attorney's fees if it prompts the insurer to engage in the appraisal process.

Reasoning: The Third District Court of Appeal, presided over by Judge Gordo, determined that the Deitschs' lawsuit served as a necessary catalyst in compelling Lloyds to engage in the appraisal process to resolve their claim.

Reversal and Remand for Further Proceedings

Application: The appellate court reversed the trial court's denial of attorney's fees and remanded the case for additional proceedings, aligning with the established legal principles regarding attorney's fees in insurance claims.

Reasoning: The court reversed the lower court's decision and remanded the case for further proceedings.