Florida Justice Reform Institute
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission
    • Meet the President
  • Legislative
    • On the Front Line
    • On The Front Line 2025
    • Achievements
    • 2025 Legislation
  • Appellate Work
  • FJRI in the News
  • Get Involved
    • Become a Member
    • The Committee for Florida Justice Reform
    • Contact
  • Click to open the search input field Click to open the search input field Search
  • Menu Menu
Florida Justice Reform Institute

Florida Senate Urged to Reform Attorney Fee Awards in Property Disputes

May 1, 2017/in Florida Business Daily

 

Florida Senate urged to reform attorney fee awards in property disputes
Florida Business Daily Reports | May 1, 2017

Supporters of a bill restructuring the way attorneys’ fees are awarded in some property disputes are urging the Florida Senate to tackle the issue.

HB 1421, relating to property insurance assignment agreements, passed last week 91-26 in the House and was referred Sunday to the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee.

The bill is designed to stop what supporters claim is abuse by contractors and attorneys of the assignments of benefits (AOB) system, which allows for a third party to put in a claim for services instead of an insured homeowner.

It is a good, sensible solution to the problem, said William Large of the Florida Justice Reform Institute, which campaigns on tort reform and other legal issues.

“We need to get the Senate to pass this bill,” Large told Florida Business Daily. “It needs to be fixed for the benefit of all citizens. Somebody is paying for this, and that somebody is the insured who are paying higher premiums.”

Contractors called to carry out repairs, particularly water damage, are accused of strong-arming panicked homeowners into signing an AOB form with promises they will deal with the insurance company.

But some contractors, it is claimed, will put in an inflated claim, often only slightly, which may be disputed by the insurance company. And under the one-way attorney fee system, all legal fees are paid by the insurer if the amount ultimately awarded is greater than the initial offer.

Under the bill, AOB still will be allowed, but the fee structure for attorneys will change. If the award is less than 25 percent more than the offer, the insurer gets the fee. If it is between 25 and 50 percent, neither side collects; if it’s over 50 percent, the attorney gets paid.

Florida’s insurance commissioner, David Altmaier, has called for reform, as have insurance companies, including Citizens, the state-run payer. All say the practice has resulted in soaring insurance premiums.

According to Altmaier, between 2010 and 2015, there was a 46 percent increase in water claims, a 28 percent increase in severity and a trebling of AOB agreements. AOB lawsuits increased from 405 in 2006 to 28,200 in 2016.

The bill also includes other provisions to introduce more transparency, including itemized estimates of work and allowing policyholders to rescind an agreement with a specified period of time.

https://flbusinessdaily.com/stories/511110296-florida-senate-urged-to-reform-attorney-fee-awards-in-property-disputes 

https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/fjri-news.jpg 800 800 RAD Tech https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Florida-Justice-Reform-Institute.jpg RAD Tech2017-05-01 15:57:292024-12-11 17:55:06Florida Senate Urged to Reform Attorney Fee Awards in Property Disputes
Florida Justice Reform Institute

Alarm Grows Among Business Leaders as Prejudgment Interest Bills Move Through Legislature

March 1, 2017/in Florida Business Daily

 

Alarm grows among business leaders as prejudgment interest bills move through legislature

Florida Business Daily Reports | Mar 1, 2017

The state Senate Judiciary Committee recently voted in favor of a bill that would allow prejudgment interest to be tacked on to awards in personal injury cases in Florida.

A similar bill was approved by a House subcommittee and has moved to that body’s Judiciary Committee.

Business leaders and tort reform advocates are watching the progress of the bills with some alarm, arguing it is another hit against the business community in a state that already has “one of the worst legal climates of all the states.”

That is the view of David Hart, executive vice president with the Florida Chamber of Commerce, who said the business community is very concerned about the legislation.

Senate Bill 334, introduced by Sen. Greg Steube (R-Sarasato), requires a court to include prejudgement interest in an award from which the plaintiff recovers both economic and non-economic damage. It also requires a court to include that same interest on attorney fees and costs.

The Senate Judiciary Committee, of which Steube is chairman, voted 6-2 in favor of the bill. The House Civil Justice and Claims Subcommittee voted 11-4 in favor of a similar bill, which was introduced by Rep. Shawn Harrison (R-Tampa).

Hart told the Florida Business Daily the bill “tilts the scales even more against business owners.”

“It will tilt the scales more in favor of trial lawyers and force businesses to just settle because if they wait it out, they will be paying 5 percent interest,” Hart said. “This is the trial lawyers’ No. 1 priority other than workers’ compensation.”

Hart said any legislation that allows plaintiff lawyers to settle earlier means they spend less time in court and therefore make more money.

Hart was reluctant to speculate on why the majority of lawmakers, including Republicans, are pushing these bills through the committees. But, he said, “I think the parties have really changed. There was a time when many people considered the Republican Party as the pro-business party. Some things have changed.”

Of the 12 organizations that contacted the house subcommittee to register an opinion, 11, mostly business groups, are opposed. The Florida Justice Association, which represents trial lawyers, supports the bill.

Hart said his organization’s members are paying close attention to the passage of the bill and are concerned it has moved in the Senate and the House. He said the chamber discussed the issue with Gov. Rick Scott, but could not say whether any assurance of a governor veto was given.

Currently, in personal injury cases in Florida, a jury will award an amount, and then interest will be added until the payment is made. That makes senses as it encourages quick payment when a jury delivers a judgment, according to William Large, president of the Florida Justice Reform Institute, which advocates for pro-business tort reform.

In short, Large said adding on prejudgment interest is burdensome, complicated and takes away discretion from both judge and jury. It is much simpler for an award to be handed down and then interest to be charged to discourage delays in payments, Large told Florida Business Daily.

http://flbusinessdaily.com/stories/511086196-alarm-grows-among-business-leaders-as-prejudgment-interest-bills-move-through-legislature

https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/fjri-news.jpg 800 800 RAD Tech https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Florida-Justice-Reform-Institute.jpg RAD Tech2017-03-01 15:56:032024-12-11 17:54:15Alarm Grows Among Business Leaders as Prejudgment Interest Bills Move Through Legislature
Florida Justice Reform Institute

Business Community Opposition Mounts to ‘Prejudgement Interest’ Bill Pending in Florida Senate

February 16, 2017/in Florida Business Daily

 

Business community opposition mounts to ‘prejudgement interest’ bill pending in Florida Senate
Florida Business Daily Reports | Feb 16, 2017

Business community opposition is mounting to legislation being considered in Tallahassee that would require Florida courts to include prejudgement interest in any final lawsuit award.

Currently, in personal injury cases in Florida, a jury will award an amount, and then interest will be added until the payment is made. Senate Bill 334, introduced by state Sen. Greg Steube (R-Sarasota), will require a court to include prejudgement interest in an award from which the plaintiff recovers both economic and non-economic damage. It also requires a court to include that same interest on attorney fees and costs.

The proposed legislation will effectively mean juries and courts would calculate, and add, all interest from the time of the injury.

Opponents of the measure, including the Florida Justice Reform Institute (FJRI), say the legislation will prove costly for Florida employers, possibly putting Sunshine State jobs at risk.

William Large, president of FJRI,  which advocates for lawsuit reform, said the plaintiffs’ bar is driving the efforts to pass this legislation.

“Effectively it will be another cost driver for businesses in Florida,” Large told Florida Business Daily. “And it is patently unfair because in a tort situation, any potential losses might be speculative in nature. It is unfair for a business to pay for losses not yet identified, not tangible.”

In short, Large argues, it is burdensome, complicated and it takes away discretion from both judge and jury. It is much more simple for an award to be handed down and then interest to be charged to discourage delays in payments.

The threat of post judgment interest encourages the losing party to pay the damages quickly, which is good public policy, according to an FJRI fact sheet on the bill.

“Florida courts have repeatedly said that prejudgment interest is not appropriate in personal injury cases and other lawsuits where the amount of damages is not defined but entirely speculative until a jury determines the amount of damages owed,” the briefing paper continued.

The bills before the legislature require incredibly burdensome, time-consuming calculations, according to FJRI.

“In a case with, for example, hundreds of physical therapy treatments, the jury will have to indicate which treatments are compensable, beginning on what date and for what individual amounts,” said Large. “Then, the court will be required to calculate prejudgment interest through the date of the judgment for each medical expense.”

In the past, prejudgement interest was awarded as a penalty for the defendant’s “wrongful” act of fighting a meritorious claim.

However, Florida courts began to reject this position some 15 years, instead recognizing that prejudgment interest may be a part of a damages award only when there is a defined amount of monetary damages. These include breach of contract cases and tort cases involving a property loss.

A hearing on the bill will take place Tuesday, February 21, 2017 in the Senate Judiciary Committee, of which Sen. Steube is chair.  Sen. Lizbeth Benacquisto (R-Ft. Myers) is vice chair of that committee.

A similar bill was filed in the House and is sponsored by Rep. Shawn Harrison (R-Tampa).

http://flbusinessdaily.com/stories/511082712-business-community-opposition-mounts-to-prejudgement-interest-bill-pending-in-florida-senate

https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/fjri-news.jpg 800 800 RAD Tech https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Florida-Justice-Reform-Institute.jpg RAD Tech2017-02-16 15:55:492024-12-11 17:53:52Business Community Opposition Mounts to ‘Prejudgement Interest’ Bill Pending in Florida Senate
Florida Justice Reform Institute

Florida Justice Reform Institute isn’t giving up fight for change despite end of legislative session

March 18, 2016/in Florida Business Daily

 

Florida Justice Reform Institute isn’t giving up fight for change despite end of legislative session

Friday, Mar 18, 2016 @ 4:54pm
By Florida Business Daily Reports

The 2016 legislative session ended today in Tallahassee with no tort reform measures passed, but that won’t stop the Florida Justice Reform Institute from pushing for future changes in the state’s legal system. 

Although William Large, president of the institute, is disappointed that no meaningful civil justice reform measures passed in 2016, the Florida Justice Reform Institute will work on Assignment of Benefit reform, Accuracy in Damages reform and third-party bad-faith reform again next year, he said, especially in light of recent survey findings released by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform. 

Florida has one of the worst lawsuit climates in the country, ranking 44th out of 50 and  sinking three slots below its 2012 ranking, according to the 2015 Lawsuit Climate Survey conducted by the Harris Poll. 

Survey participants were comprised of a national sample of 1,203 in-house general counsel, senior litigators or attorneys, and senior business executives. The rankings are based on “fairness and reasonableness” of courts within a state.

 “…That ranking is not my opinion; it is the opinion of the Institute for Legal Reform after conducting a very detailed survey,” Large told Florida Business Daily. “And the individuals who answered the survey answered it by looking at a lot of different issues, including the state of affairs of scientific and technical evidence that was admitted, discovery issues, timeliness of cases staying on a docket, damages, treatment of class-action suits, treatment of tort and contract litigation, and treatment of enforcing meaningful venue requirements.”

Large said the state’s low ranking was heavily influenced by appellate court rulings, particularly the Florida Supreme Court, and the current state of Florida’s legislature.

“I am trying to get the ranking up,” Large said. “I am trying to advocate for civil justice reform and next time this study comes out hopefully we are higher. One of the missions of the Florida Justice Reform Institute is to advocate for tort reform at our state capital. So we’ve been advocating, for example, this year for three concepts. One is third-party bad-faith reform; one (is) called Accuracy in Damages; and the third is called Assignment of Benefits reform.”

A third-party claim is filed when an insurer fails to settle a third party’s claim against the insured party within the applicable limits of the insurance policy, which leaves the insured susceptible to a judgment exceeding the policy limits.

Large used an example of an insured individual who causes an accident that severely injures or kills another motorist. If the insured has a policy limit, oftentimes the plaintiff’s attorney will file a liability lawsuit, get a large amount in a verdict and then file a third-party bad-faith lawsuit against the insurance company.

“We have lots of cases where limits are offered very quickly, within two days, seven days, two weeks; and whatever the limits might be — $10,000, $25,000, $100,000 —  they are rejected because the timing to offer the limits is seen as an issue of fact as to how quickly the insurance company tendered those limits,” Large said. “So one of the things we are trying to do is to advocate for a clear timeframe. If you offer the limits within 45 days, the insurance company cannot be held in bad faith.”

arge said there is dire need for Accuracy in Damages reform because when medical liability is being calculated in a case where liability is clear, there is a tendency for plaintiff’s attorneys to send their clients to doctors who issue letters of protection, which guarantee the health care provider will be paid when the verdict or settlement comes in. But such letters often exaggerate prices for procedures, which in turn increase the amount awarded significantly.

“What we want the jury to see is the actual market price for medical procedures, not an inflated letter of protection,” Large said.

On the issue of Assignment of Benefits, reform is necessary because corporations are taking advantage of insurers and the one-way attorney’s fee by requesting that the policyholder’s benefits be extended to the corporation when they repair damages in property insurance claims.

“The reason they are doing it is not just to get … more (than) whatever the repair is, but because with that assignment comes the one-way attorney’s fees,” Large said. “And the attorneys then litigate whether or not that repair was the market price. They do it and they are the beneficiary of the one-way attorney’s fee that has now been assigned to the third-party vendor. That in a nutshell is the third issue we are working on.”

Under the “one-way provision,” only one of the parties receives attorneys’ fees.

Florida State Rep. Kathleen Passidomo (R-District 106) has sponsored some key legal reform legislation, and Large is counting on her help again during the next legislative session. 

“(Passidomo) has been a strong advocate for civil justice reform,” Large said. “She is an extraordinary leader. I cannot say enough good things about Rep. Kathleen Passidomo. She is brilliant. She is a hard worker; she understands these issues; she understands what this means for consumers in terms of increased costs, increased litigation.”

http://flbusinessdaily.com/stories/510702358-florida-justice-reform-institute-isn-t-giving-up-fight-for-change-despite-end-of-legislative-session?utm_medium=Email&utm_source=ExactTarget&utm_campaign=&utm_content=

https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/fjri-news.jpg 800 800 RAD Tech https://www.fljustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Florida-Justice-Reform-Institute.jpg RAD Tech2016-03-18 15:57:192024-12-11 17:55:10Florida Justice Reform Institute isn’t giving up fight for change despite end of legislative session
Search Search

FJRI News Categories

FJRI News Archive

Florida Justice Reform Institute

Florida Justice Reform Institute

  • Phone

    (850) 222-0170

  • Hours of Operation

    Monday – Friday, 9 a.m.-5 p.m.

  • Address

    210 S Monroe Street
    Tallahassee, FL 32301

Site Links

  • The Committee for Florida Justice Reform
  • About
  • Legislative
  • Appellate Work
  • FJRI in the News
  • Get Involved
© 2025 Florida Justice Reform Institute, All Rights Reserved. | Website Hosting & Web Development by RAD TECH
  • Link to Facebook
  • Link to X
  • Link to LinkedIn
Scroll to top Scroll to top Scroll to top