CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION
v.
ROSANNA WEBER, ET AL.

Fla. 3d DCA | 2026-10-21
No. 2025-1826
Gordo, J., Lobree, J., Bokor, J., Diaz, J.
2026 FL 14065 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2026)

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.


Holding

A trial court may award a contingency fee multiplier to counsel when supported by competent, substantial evidence, but post-judgment interest must be calculated at a variable rate adjusted annually under Florida Statute § 55.03(3), not at a constant fixed rate.


Headnotes

[1] Post-judgment interest on a final judgment must be calculated at a variable rate adjusted annually on January 1 in accordance with the interest rate set by the Chief Fina…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Key Quotes

“The interest rate is established at the time a judgment is obtained and such interest rate shall be adjusted annually on January 1 of each year in accordance with the interest rate in effect on that date as set by the Chief Financial Officer until the judgment is paid.”

Explaining the statutory requirement for variable post-judgment interest rates under Florida law.

Facts & Procedural History

Citizens Property Insurance Corporation appealed a final judgment awarding attorney's fees and costs to its insureds, Rosanna and Randy Weber, which i…

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.


Opinion of the Court

Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed October 21, 2026.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

No. 3D25-1826

Lower Tribunal No. 21-16120-CA-01 Citizens Property Insurance Corporation,

Appellant,

VS.

Rosanna Weber, et al.,

Appellees.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Reemberto Diaz, Judge.

Traub Lieberman Straus & Shrewsberry LLP and C. Ryan Jones and David T. Burr (St. Petersburg), for appellant. Alvarez, Feltman, Da Silva & Costa, PL and Paul B. Feltman, for appellees.

Before GORDO, LOBREE and BOKOR, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Citizens Property Insurance Corporation appeals a final judgment awarding attorney's fees and costs in favor of its insureds, appellees Rosanna and Randy Weber, challenging the award of a contingency fee multiplier to the Webers' trial co-counsel, Alvarez Feltman Da Silva & Costa, PLLC, and the award of post-judgment interest calculated at a fixed rate.¹ Because the trial court's application of a contingency fee multiplier is supported by competent, substantial evidence, we affirm the final judgment awarding attorney's fees and costs. However, the Webers commendably acknowledge that the final judgment erroneously provides that postjudgment interest is to be calculated at a constant rate until the judgment is satisfied. See § 55.03(3), Fla. Stat. (2025) (“The interest rate is established at the time a judgment is obtained and such interest rate shall be adjusted annually on January 1 of each year in accordance with the interest rate in effect on that date as set by the Chief Financial Officer until the judgment is paid . . . ."); Townsend v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co., 192 So. 3d 1223, 1224-25 (Fla. 2016). Accordingly, we remand with directions to amend the final judgment to provide for a variable rate of interest in accordance with section 55.03(3).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions.

Footnotes
1 ""Both the fee award and application of a multiplier are reviewed for an abuse of discretion,' and therefore must be supported by competent, substantial evidence.” Little v. Bath & Kitchen Boutique, LLC, 435 So. 3d 1142, 1144 n.1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2026) (citation omitted) (quoting Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's London v. Candelaria, 339 So. 3d 463, 467 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)); see also Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Medero, 406 So. 3d 323, 326 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025) (“Although a trial court's determination to apply a multiplier to the lodestar amount is reviewed for an abuse of discretion, the trial court's findings as to the multiplier itself must be supported by competent substantial evidence.").

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw