Security First Insurance Co. v. Annon
The Fifth DCA reversed a 2.0 contingency fee multiplier applied to a $125,080 lodestar fee awarded to insureds under section 627.428 in a first-party property case. The insureds' fee expert conceded he did not handle first-party property cases, never spoke with the insureds, and made no inquiry whether other attorneys would take such a case without a multiplier; there was also no evidence the insureds could not afford a retainer or hourly rates. The court remanded for an amended judgment awarding the lodestar only.
Key facts
- Security First Insurance Co. appealed a trial court award of attorney's fees to insureds in a first-party property insurance case under section 627.428, challenging a 2.0 contingency fee multiplier applied to a $125,080 lodestar fee.
- The insureds' fee expert testified without having handled first-party property cases, without speaking to the insureds, and without investigating whether other attorneys would accept the case without a multiplier; there was no evidence the insureds could not afford a retainer or hourly rates.
- +1 more key fact with a free trial
Why it matters
This decision reinforces the Fifth DCA's strict evidentiary approach to contingency fee multipliers in first-party property cases governed by the now-repealed section 627.428, and provides a usable roadmap for insurers… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.