Southeast Floating Docks, Inc. v. Auto-Owners Insurance Co.
82 So. 3d 73
| Fla. | 2012Background
- Auto-Owners issued a performance bond related to Southeast’s contract with Michigan-law choice; Rivermar settled with Auto-Owners for $956,987.
- A dispute arose; a first trial in Florida favored Southeast, judgment against Auto-Owners for no liability, later overturned for a new trial.
- District court granted a new trial; retrial scheduled for 2007; Southeast and Simpson offered Auto-Owners $300,000 under § 768.79.
- Auto-Owners rejected; March 2007 summary judgment in its favor for over $1.1 million; Southeast challenged by appeal to Eleventh Circuit.
- Eleventh Circuit certified three questions to Florida Supreme Court regarding Florida’s offer of judgment statute and its conflict-of-laws implications.
- Florida contract contained a Michigan substantive-law clause; issue disputed whether 768.79 applies when parties choose non-Florida substantive law.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does § 768.79 apply where the contract selects Michigan law? | Southeast: statute applies irrespective of chosen substantive law. | Auto-Owners: statute barred by chosen Michigan substantive law. | Statute is substantive; does not apply when Michigan law governs. |
| Should the first two certified questions be decided if third is dispositive (moot)? | Questions remain relevant beyond mootness. | Questions moot; resolution unnecessary. | First two questions moot; solely third governs remand. |
Key Cases Cited
- Knealing v. Puleo, 675 So.2d 593 (Fla. 1996) (statutory right to fees; constitutionality)
- TGI Friday’s, Inc. v. Dvorak, 663 So.2d 606 (Fla. 1995) (procedural-discretion vs. substantive rights; §768.79)
- Timmons v. Combs, 608 So.2d 1 (Fla. 1992) (substantive nature of fee-shifting statute)
- BDO Seidman, LLP v. British Car Auctions, Inc., 802 So.2d 366 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (Restatement-like analysis; policy and applicability)
- Walls v. Quick & Reilly, Inc., 824 So.2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (public policy vs. freedom to contract)
- Precision Tune Auto Care, Inc. v. Radcliffe, 815 So.2d 708 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (contractual choice-of-law on fees)
- Mazzoni Farms, Inc. v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours Co., 761 So.2d 306 (Fla. 2000) (public policy in conflict of laws)