State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Curran

135 So. 3d 280, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 122, 2014 Fla. LEXIS 954, 2014 WL 1058134
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided March 13, 2014·No. No. SC12-157·Published

Opinion

POLSTON, C.J.,

dissenting.

Because I would order the trial court to vacate the judgment against State Farm, I would deny Curran’s motion for attorney’s fees and grant State Farm’s Case No. SC12-157 Page 2 motion for attorney’s fees, conditioned upon the trial court’s finding that State Farm is entitled to fees pursuant to its proposal for settlement.

CANADY, J., concurs.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Curran, 135 So. 3d 280, 39 Fla. L. Weekly Supp. 122, 2014 Fla. LEXIS 954, 2014 WL 1058134 (Fla. 2014).

135 So. 3d 280 (State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Curran) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.