Morgan & Morgan tells its lawyers to offer insurance carriers no courtesies

Insurance companies may be celebrating a change in Florida law intended to limit aggressive litigation. But the state’s largest personal injury law firm will give carriers no quarter.

A Morgan & Morgan the company-wide memo suggests the firm’s only adjustment in legal strategy will be to push defendants harder.

“As we enter this new era, I want to make it unequivocally clear that we will not be giving an inch to carriers ever again,” wrote Matt Morganthe firm’s morgan/”managing partnerand Reuven Moskowitzthe firm’s Chief Operating Officer. “Not one inch.”

The memo says lawyers are not authorized to grant extensions to attorneys representing insurers.

“They can figure it out or file a motion,” the executives wrote. “Under no circumstances will we be agreeing to any continuity, discovery extensions, or request to extend (the) deadline to answer complaints.”

Describing “red line rules” for the new legal environment, Morgan and Moskowitz said it would be a “serious internal offense if we find any courtesies being extended to the insurance industry.”

That posture goes across the board, including for any litigation that predates the March and the Legislative Session.

The Legislature approved a massive tort package (HB 837) that became the first bill passed in Session to be signed by Gov. Ron DeSantis.

The bill eliminates the requirement that policyholders cover attorneys’ fees for any party prevailing in a lawsuit against an insurance company.

While lawmakers stressed that Florida statute still allows avenues for plaintiffs to recover court costs, trial lawyers stressed that it’s less likely in cases where parties settle, the outcome of a vast majority of lawsuits against carriers.

It’s clear from the memo that lawyers take the change personally.

“We may want to help the human being defense attorney because we know them

Read the rest

Lawyer accused of breaching 14 separate Rules of Professional Conduct ordered to pay over 60k to LSO

The LSO further sought disbursements of $11,075.08, which comprised two charges, $10,357.96 for Ellwood Evidence Inc. – the last-minute responding expert report – and $717.12 for printing and delivery.

Considering the Perrelli factors, the tribunal wrote that the proceedings were above average complexity and required the LSO to call additional witnesses, which lengthened the hearing due to the vast materials, multiple complaints, and “aggressive defense” by Deokaran, including raising last-minute defences.

“The lawyer’s service, at the last minute, of a purported expert report required the law society to retain an expert on a rush basis, leading to higher costs and a longer hearing,” the tribunal wrote.

The tribunal wrote that because Deokaran raised the issue regarding another cause of the disputed emails, she should bear all the resulting expenses, specifically the entire costs incurred for the responding report of Ellwood Evidence Inc. However, the panel declined to award any fees related to printing expenses as the tribunal operates electronically to the extent reasonably possible.

Deokaran’s interlocutory suspension is partly due to her disciplinary history of failing to cooperate with the LSO. For example, she was licensed to practice in 2011 but was administratively suspended for 19 days in 2012 for unpaid LawPRO premiums.

Read the rest