MIAMI (Legal Newsline) – Plaintiffs attorneys won’t be able to move forward with a lawsuit against a law firm that defended an insurance company by disclosing what was alleged to be confidential information.
On June 17, the Florida Third District Court of Appeal ruled for Cozen O’Connor in a lawsuit brought by plaintiffs firm Mintz Truppman over conduct in a separate case involving a six-figure insurance claim.
Mintz Truppman was trying to prove it was owed $828,056 for securing a $125,000 settlement for a client who suffered water damage at her home. The firm represented her in a lawsuit against Lexington Insurance.
But Cozen O’Connor, the firm defending Lexington, said $125,000 reached in mediation did not represent a complete recovery for the client, so that high of a fees award was unjustified. To make this argument, Cozen O’Connor included Mintz Campbell’s pre-mediation demand letter that, apparently, said the property damage was more than $125,000, when it tried to sway a federal judge tasked with deciding the fees issued.
Ultimately, a federal judge awarded Mintz Campbell around $269,000. But the firm had also sued Cozen O’Connor for including the pre-mediation demand letter in its arguments.
Mintz Campbell alleged violation of Florida’s Mediation Confidentiality and Privilege Act, as well as other claims.
The trial court and appellate court categorized this new lawsuit as attempting to earn additional fees from the first lawsuit and said they did not have jurisdiction over it.
“In sum, Mintz seeks to relitigate in state court a fee claim that the federal court determined with finality,” Judge Edwin Scales wrote.