TITLE AND TRUST CO. OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
SALIBA E. SALAMEH, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Title and Trust Company of Florida appealed the trial court's grant of summary judgment awarding attorney fees to Salameh under Florida's insurance statute. The court reversed, holding that summary judgment was improper because there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the lawsuit and attorney services were necessary to obtain performance of the insurance commitment.
Summary judgment was improper because Title and Trust raised a genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the suit and attorney services were necessary to enforce the insurance commitment. Although a judgment against the insurer is ordinarily required by the statute, the court recognized that where there is no judgment, there must be a finding that the suit and attorney services were necessary to obtain performance.
[1] A summary judgment is only proper when there is no genuine issue of material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
[2] The purpose of statutes providing for attorney fees in insurance cases is to discourage litigation and encourage prompt disposition of valid insurance claims without liti…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“summary judgment only be granted where there is no genuine issue as to material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law”
Establishes the applicable legal standard for summary judgment under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.510(c)
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSalameh sued Title and Trust Company for delivery of a title insurance policy and attorney fees. Before trial, the parties settled by having Salameh d…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Insurance Litigation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiff Salameh sued Title and Trust Company of Florida demanding delivery of a title insurance policy and attorney fees and costs. Prior to trial, the parties consummated an exchange whereby Salameh delivered an affidavit on his knowledge of a rumored title flaw and Title and Trust delivered the title insurance policy. Salameh then moved for summary judgment for attorney fees as a matter of law which Title and Trust denied on the grounds that the action was moot, that the complaint had been unnecessary and unreasonable, and that § 627.428(1), Florida Statutes (1980), did not provide for attorney fees under the circumstances of the case.
The trial court granted Salameh’s motion for summary judgment and set for later hearing the amount of attorney fees to be awarded. At this later hearing, the trial court issued the judgment for attorney fees after denying Title and Trust’s evidence proferred for the purpose of showing that the suit and the attorney’s services were not necessary.
We reverse and remand.
We note first that appellee has failed to file an answer brief as required by Fla.R.App.P. 9.210 and echo the words of our sister court in Carlin v. Carlin, 310 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975) that omission of this responsibility to support the ruling of the trial court places an undue burden on the appellate court, and, if appellee believes the ruling is not worthy of support, he should confess error and join appellant in seeking a reversal.
Turning to the appeal itself, Fla.R. Civ.P. 1.510(c) requires that summary judgment only be granted where there is no genuine issue as to material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In the present ease Title and Trust raised the issue and contended that the filing of the complaint and the attorney’s services were unnecessary to enforce the commitment for title insurance. There was no judgment on the issue of non-performance.
However, we do not deem such a judgment is essential, notwithstanding that § 627.428, Florida Statutes (1980) does state that the basis for awarding attorney fees is “[ujpon the rendition of a judgment or decree . . . against an insurer and in favor of an insured . . . . ” We regard the purpose of the statute is to “discourage litigation and encourage prompt disposition of valid insurance claims without litigation.” Gibson v. Walker, 380 So. 2d 531, 533 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). See also Cincinnati Insurance Company v. Palmer, 297 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974).
However, in the absence of a judgment there must be a showing and a finding that the suit and attorney services were necessary to obtain performance of the insurance contract. We deem that there was in this case such an issue on this material fact and that the entry of summary judgment was not justified.
REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
SHAW and JOANOS, JJ., and BEN C. WILLIS, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Fla. Soc'y OF Ophthalmology, 538 So. 2d 878 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…epartment’s standing to maintain the rule challenge and thus should have declined to review the merits of the hearing officer’s decision invalidating the rule. In support of this contention, appellants cite Title and Trust Co. of Florida v. Salameh, 407 So. 2d 1035 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981), and argue that we held in that case that an appellee is obligated to file an answer brief, and reversed the lower court’s decision because the appellee in Sa-lameh failed to file a brief. We do not agree. Although the court’s op…
-
Fla. Auto. Dealers Indus. Benefit Tr. v. Small, 592 So. 2d 1179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…torney’s fees pursuant to section 627.6698. We first point out that our review of this case has been impeded by appellee’s failure to file an answer brief, an omission that placed an undue burden on this court. Title & Trust Co. of Fla. v. Salameh, 407 So. 2d 1035, 1035-36 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Nevertheless, we conclude that attorney’s fees were properly awarded pursuant to section 627.6698, which provides: Upon the rendition of a judgment by any of the courts of this state against, an insurer and in favor o…
-
Miller v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass'n, Inc., 200 So. 3d 200 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)…GA affirmative relief on appeal without it having filed a cross-appeal. Once Miller filed an appeal, absent a need to capitulate obvious error, FIGA was required to defend the trial court’s ruling on appeal. See Title & Trust Co. of Fla. v. Salameh, 407 So. 2d 1035, 1035-36 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (stating that the appellee’s failure to file an answer brief in support of the trial court’s ruling “places an undue burden on the appellate court,” and noting that the alternative is for the appellee to “confess error a…
Authorities Cited
- The Cincinnati Ins. Co. v. Palmer, 297 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)
- Gibson v. Walker, 380 So. 2d 531 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Carlin v. Stan Carlin, 310 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)