Krock v. Rozinsky, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 161

Krock appealed a final judgment awarding attorney’s fees and costs to State Farm under a settlement offer.
Krock challenged the trial court’s denial of a continuance of the fee hearing.
Plaintiff pursued a negligence action (1999 accident) and later an underinsured motorist claim against State Farm; State Farm offered a settlement she did not accept.
At trial, Krock recovered less than the settlement offer; appellate fees were set by the trial court on remand from an appellate decision.
After the underlying judgment, Krock’s attorney withdrew; motions to tax fees were filed in 2008-2009, with a long prior history of continuances based on Krock’s health.
In October 2009, Krock provided a doctor’s note claiming 100% disability and incapacity to travel, seeking a nine-month continuance; the trial court denied extension and proceeded to hear the fee motions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the denial of the continuance was an abuse of discretion	Krock contends illness warranted a longer continuance.	State Farm argues the request was dilatory and impractical given prior continuances.	No abuse; denial affirmed

Fleming v. Fleming, 710 So.2d 601 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (factors for continuance under abuse of discretion standard)
Ziegler v. Klein, 590 So.2d 1066 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) (illness may warrant reversal if prevents fair presentation)
Myers v. Siegel, 920 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (additional factors for illness-related continuances)
A.P.D. Holdings, Inc. v. Reidel, 865 So.2d 682 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (standard for denial of continuance; abuse of discretion framework)
Doctors Assocs., Inc. v. Thomas, 898 So.2d 159 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (appellate courts may not consider matters outside the record)