Magic Tinting Window & Car Alarm, Inc. v. Scottsdale Insurance Co.

This case is before us on Scottsdale Insurance Company’s (Scottsdale) amended motion for appellate attorney fees filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.400. Scottsdale’s claim for fees is based upon section 768.79, Florida Statutes (2013) (Florida’s “Offer of judgment and demand for judgment” statute); Scottsdale served a proposal for settlement on Magic Tinting Window & Car Alarm, Inc. (Magic Tinting) on or about March 21, 2006.

Scottsdale prevailed below and obtained a final judgment in its favor on October 2, 2013. Magic Tinting filed its notice of appeal of the final…