Proposal For Settlement

Posted May 1, 2012
Proposal For Settlement, Attorney's Fees—        
Duplantis v. Brock Specialty Services, LTD., et al.,
37 Fla. L. Weekly D1010b(5D11-620, April 27, 2012)
Fifth DCA Holds Invalid A Proposal For Settlement Made By The Defendant/Employer, Who Denied Vicarious Liability, Where The Proposal For Settlement Sought The Release Of The Defendant/Employee As Well

September 12, 2011
Proposal For Settlement, Attorney Fees—        
Jones v. Publix Supermarkets, Inc.,
36 FLW D1966a (Fla. 4th DCA Sept. 7, 2011)
Fourth DCA Upholds Proposal For Settlement Which Had Limited Description Of Proposed Release That Was A Condition Of Proposal, Finding That Under Facts Of Case Condition Was Sufficiently Clear

Posted March 2, 2011
Proposals For Settlement, Attorneys Fees—        
Rossmore v. Smith,
36 FLW D417a (Fla. 5th DCA Feb. 25, 2011)
Fifth DCA Affirms Fees Based On Proposal For Settlement From Two Defendants To A Single Plaintiff Where Amount From Each Defendant Was Clear

Posted January 4, 2011
Proposal For Settlement, Attorney Fees—        
Gawtrey v. Hayward,
35 FLW D2886a (Fla. 2nd DCA Dec. 22, 2010)
Second DCA Upholds Nominal Proposal For Settlement And Reverses Order Denying Defendant Fees

Posted November 2, 2010
PFS, Attorney Fees—        
Darrow v. Heitman,
35 FLW D2417a (Fla. 2nd DCA, Oct. 29, 2010)
Second DCA Affirms Denial Of Attorney Fee Under Proposal for Settlement Where Proposal Required Release But Failed To Either Attach Proposed Release Or Provide Summary Of Release Terms

Posted August 5, 2010
Proposal For Settlement—        
Donovan Marine, Inc. v. Delmonico,
35 FLW D1495 (Fla. 4th DCA, July 7, 2010)
Fourth DCA Finds Proposal For Settlement To Be Enforceable Rejects Argument That Requirement For Plaintiff To Acknowledge That Defendant Does Not Admit Liability Was not Ambiguous And That Proposal Was Otherwise Compliant

Posted April 6, 2010
Proposal For Settlement—        
Attorney's Title Ins. Fund, Inc. v. Gorka, 35 FLW S196 (Fla., Apr. 1, 2010)
Florida Supreme Court Holds That Proposal For Settlement Is Invalid If It Is Conditioned Upon Actions Out Of The Control Of the Offeree