Background
Florida Insurance Guaranty Association challenged a Broward County circuit court order resolving competing motions to enforce a settlement agreement with Joanna and James Cantwell. The trial court denied FIGA’s motion, granted the Cantwells’ motion, and required FIGA to pay the full settlement amount, including the portion allocated to attorneys’ fees.
The complaint sought attorneys’ fees, and the settlement agreement and release stated that the payment was inclusive of attorneys’ fees. The agreed payment was divided between a portion payable to the Cantwells and another portion payable to their counsel.
The Court’s Holding
The Fourth District held that the trial court erred by requiring FIGA to pay the entire settlement amount, including the portion allocated to attorneys’ fees. The court agreed with FIGA that attorneys’ fees were not part of the covered claims FIGA was obligated to pay.
Applying its recent decisions in Florida Insurance Guaranty Association v. Hintz and Florida Insurance Guaranty Association v. Wilson, the court reversed and remanded with instructions to vacate the order requiring full payment and to enter an order granting FIGA’s motion to enforce the settlement.
Key Takeaways
- A settlement’s characterization of a payment as inclusive of attorneys’ fees did not require FIGA to pay the portion allocated to those fees.
- The division of settlement proceeds between the insureds and their counsel did not make the attorneys’ fees portion a covered claim payable by FIGA.
- The Fourth District directed the trial court to grant FIGA’s motion to enforce the settlement rather than the insureds’ competing motion.
Why It Matters
The decision reinforces the Fourth District’s recent treatment of attorneys’ fees included in settlements involving FIGA. A trial court may not require FIGA to pay an attorneys’ fees allocation merely because the complaint requested fees and the settlement amount was stated to include them.