Florida Appellate Court Rules Against Geico in Attorney Fee Dispute with Steinger, Greene & Feiner
On Wednesday, the Third DCA affirmed a lower court's final judgment holding the insurance company liable for the firm's fees. Geico failed to inform the firm that a settlement had been reached with a former client, despite receiving notice of a charging lien.
June 27, 2019 at 02:48 PM
3 minute read
Florida's Third District Court of Appeal is holding a major insurance carrier's feet to the fire for failing to acknowledge a personal injury law firm's charging lien.
The appellate court Wednesday upheld a Miami-Dade Circuit Court's final judgment, which held Geico General Insurance Co. was negligent in failing to inform the Steinger, Greene & Feiner law firm of a $175,000 settlement that had been reached with a former client.
According to the opinion, the law firm — which formerly went by Steinger, Iscoe & Greene — sent Geico notice of an attorney lien after being discharged as counsel by Aniushka Monsalve, who had retained the firm for negotiations with the insurance company. However, once the settlement was reached, Geico did not include Steinger as a payee in the settlement check issued to Monsalve's new lawyer.
Steinger and Geico later entered negotiations to resolve the outstanding lien. Once the talks broke down, the firm filed suit against the insurance company in order to obtain its fees.
“The trial court found Geico negligent, held it to be jointly and severally liable for SIG's charging lien, and entered a final judgment in favor of [Steinger] for $50,000.00,” the opinion said. Upon Geico's appeal, the appellate panel ruled the lower court had not erred in finding the company was negligent and “breached its duty to [Steinger] for failing to protect” its charging lien. Wednesday's opinion reasoned “to perfect a charging lien, the lienor-attorney need only demonstrate that he or she provided the parties to the litigation with timely notice of the interest.”
“Here, it is undisputed that upon being terminated, [Steinger] timely filed its charging lien, notifying Geico and Litigation Law of its interest in recouping the fees earned during the course of representing Monsalvo, however briefly,” the opinion said. The ruling asserted there had been several instances where Geico could have notified Steinger that the case had been resolved such as “including [Steinger] on the settlement check or obtaining [Steinger's] waiver of its lien in writing, or obtaining a Hold Harmless agreement from Litigation Law.”
Read the appellate court's opinion:
Rather, “Geico did none of these things,” the court wrote.
Young, Bill, Boles, Palmer & Duke lawyers B. Richard Young, Adam Duke, and Cody Pflueger represented Geico before the appellate court. They did not immediately return requests for comment.
Steinger's appellate counsel, Burlington & Rockenbach attorney Andrew Harris, said the Third DCA's order fortified the financial obligation insurance companies have to attorneys who may no longer be active in a case.
“Yesterday's decision reinforces that insurance carriers have an affirmative duty to ensure that prior attorneys are fairly compensated for their work that benefited the injured plaintiff,” Harris said. “All attorneys who represent injured parties will now be assured that they will not be left out of a settlement reached between successor attorneys and insurance companies. This entire litigation should have been unnecessary and would have been unnecessary if the insurance company had fulfilled its duty of care.”
Related stories:
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDivided State Court Reinstates Dispute Over Replacement Vehicles Fees
5 minute readBack-To-Back Hurricanes' Impact on Florida Legal Work Will Go Beyond Usual Suspects
5 minute readHolland & Knight Snags 2 Insurance Partners in New York and Philadelphia From Goodwin
3 minute readTurning the Tables: Defense Litigators Embrace Lawsuits, Alleging Fraud at Plaintiffs Shops
6 minute readTrending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250