Frosti v. Creel
This text of 943 So. 2d 1023 (Frosti v. Creel) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Sandra FROSTI, Appellant,
v.
LaVerne CREEL, as Personal Representative of the Estate of William H. Houk, deceased, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
William J. Capito of Law Offices of William J. Capito, Lutz, for Appellant.
Scot E. Samis and Jeffrey M. Adams of Abbey, Adams, Byelick, Kiernan, Mueller & Lancaster, L.L.P., St. Petersburg, for Appellee.
SALCINES, Judge.
Sandra Frosti appeals the trial court's order entered after final judgment which denied her motion for attorney's fees and costs pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442 and section 768.79(1), Florida Statutes (1995), because her proposals *1024 for settlement had been filed prematurely. We affirm. See Bottcher v. Walsh, 834 So.2d 183 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). In Mills v. Martinez, 909 So.2d 340, 344 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005), the Fifth District certified conflict with Bottcher; accordingly, we certify conflict with Mills.
Affirmed; conflict certified.
NORTHCUTT and SILBERMAN, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
943 So. 2d 1023, 2006 WL 3733321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/frosti-v-creel-fladistctapp-2006.