Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Geico General Insurance Company v. Thomas A. Moultrop and Patricia Guy Moultrop, 4D15-2772 (2015)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida Number: 4D15-2772 Visitors: 14
Filed: Nov. 12, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. THOMAS A. MOULTROP and PATRICIA GUY MOULTROP, Respondents. No. 4D15-2772 [November 12, 2015] Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Catherine M. Brunson, Judge; L.T. Case No. 05-2009-CA- 42658-MB AO. B. Richard Young, Adam A. Duke, Michel A. Morgan and Richard A. Weldy of Young, Bill, Roumbos & Boles, P.A., Miami, for petitioner. Andrew A
More
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT GEICO GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. THOMAS A. MOULTROP and PATRICIA GUY MOULTROP, Respondents. No. 4D15-2772 [November 12, 2015] Petition for Writ of Certiorari to the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Catherine M. Brunson, Judge; L.T. Case No. 05-2009-CA- 42658-MB AO. B. Richard Young, Adam A. Duke, Michel A. Morgan and Richard A. Weldy of Young, Bill, Roumbos & Boles, P.A., Miami, for petitioner. Andrew A. Harris of Burlington & Rockenbach, P.A., West Palm Beach, and Todd S. Stewart of The Law Offices of Todd S. Stewart, P.A., Jupiter, for respondents. ON RESPONDENTS’ MOTION FOR APPELLATE ATTORNEY’S FEES PER CURIAM. Geico General Insurance Company filed a petition for writ of certiorari challenging an order requiring it to produce documents. Without ordering a response under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100(h), this court denied the petition on August 18, 2015. Geico moved for rehearing and, on September 28, 2015, the respondents filed a response to that motion and also moved for attorney’s fees. Rule 9.400(b)(2) provides that “in original proceedings” a motion for attorney’s fees “shall be served not later than . . . the time for service of the petitioner’s reply to the response to the petition.” Here, the court denied the petition without requiring a response to the petition or, obviously, a reply to a response. Having been first filed after the petition had been denied, the motion for appellate attorney’s fees is denied as untimely. CIKLIN, C.J., GROSS and LEVINE, JJ., concur. * * * -2-
Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer