STREMS LAW FIRM v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION (2021)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

The STREMS LAW FIRM, P.A., and Yoel Guerra, et al., Appellants, v. CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION, Appellee.

Nos. 3D20-919, 3D20-920

Decided: June 23, 2021

Before FERNANDEZ, SCALES and GORDO, JJ.

Giasi Law, P.A., Melissa A. Giasi and Erin M. Berger (Tampa), for appellant, The Strems Law Firm, P.A.; The Property Advocates, P.A., Samuel C. Gold and Cecile S. Mendizabal, for appellants, Yoel Guerra, Ketty Evelyn Boza and Ihosvany Almore. Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., and Mark D. Tinker (Tampa), for appellee.

Affirmed. See Curbelo v. Ullman, 571 So. 2d 443, 444 (Fla. 1990) (“Rule 1.540 was intended to provide relief from judgments, decrees or orders under a limited set of circumstances. This rule was not intended to serve as a substitute ․ for appellate review of judicial error.” (internal quotation omitted)); see also Moakley v. Smallwood, 826 So. 2d 221, 226 (Fla. 2002) (“[A] trial court possesses the inherent authority to impose attorneys’ fees against an attorney for bad faith conduct.”); Commonwealth Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Tubero, 569 So. 2d 1271, 1273 (Fla. 1990) (reaffirming that a trial judge has the “discretion to order dismissal or default for failure to comply with discovery requirements”).

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network