Legal Opinion

Highlands Insurance Co. v. Kravecas

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 1, 2000No. 3D99-1656Published

1Per curiam

Although we find no abuse of discretion in the determinations of the time appropriately expended by the plaintiffs attorney and his hourly rate, we conclude that there is no basis for the 2.0 multiplier applied by the trial court. See Standard Guar. Ins. Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So.2d 828 (Fla.1990); Gonzalez v. Veloso, 731 So.2d 63 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Simmons v. Royal Floral Distributors, Inc., 724 So.2d 99 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); Askowitz v. Susan Feuer Interior Design, Inc., 563 So.2d 752 *764(Fla. 3d DCA 1990), review denied, 576 So.2d 292 (Fla.1991).

Accordingly, the cause is remanded with…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Standard Guar. Ins. Co. v. QuanstromSupreme Court of Florida · 1990
  2. Askowitz v. Susan Feuer Interior Design, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
  3. Gonzalez v. VelosoDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1999
  4. Simmons v. ROYAL FLORAL DISTRIBUTORSDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API