Haddad. Tonja 6/2612014 For Educational Use Only Walter BIRO and David Swinscoe, Appellants/Plaintiffs, v 2008 WL 3849683... 2008 WL 3849683 (Fla.App. 4 Dist.) (Appellate Brief) District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District. Walter BIRO and David Swinscoe, Appellants/Plaintiffs, v. Michael BIRO, Appellee. No. 4D08-1855. July 16, 2008. On Appeal from a Non-Final Order from the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County, Florida Circuit Court Case No.: 02-14383 (23) Initial Brief of Appellants/Plaintiffs Walter Biro and David Swinscoe Shawn L. Birken, Esq., Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, Counsel for Appellants/Plaintiffs, Las Olas City Centre, Suite 1650, 401 East Las Olas Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301, Tel: (954) 522-3456, Fax: (954) 527-8663. *iii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF AUTHORITIES IV I. JURISDICTION 1 II. PARTIES TO THE PROCEEDINGS 1 III. STATEMENT OF THE CASE AND OF THE FACTS 2 IV. ISSUES ON APPEAL 3 1. THE PROPOSALS FOR SETTLEMENT WERE AMBIGUOUS SO AS TO RENDER THEM 3 FLAWED AND NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH RULE I .442(cX2Xb) AND, THEREFORE, SHOULD NOT BE RELIED UPON IN GRANTING APPELLEE ATTORNEYS' FEES PURSUANT TO THE RULE AND PERTINENT FLORIDA STATUTES 2. THE PROPOSALS FOR SETTLEMENT WERE NOT MADE IN GOOD FAITH AND WERE NOT A 3 GENUINE ATTEMPT TO SETTLE THE UNDERLYING MATTER BEWTEEN THE PARTIES V. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT 3 VI. ARGUMENT 7 POINT I: APPELLEE/DEFENDANT'S PROPOSALS FOR SETTLEMENT WAS AMBIGUOUS 7 A. STANDARD OF REVIEW 7 B. APPELLEE/DEFENDANT'S PROPOSALS FOR SETTLEMENT WAS AMBIGUOUS 8 POINT II: ASSUMING ARGUENDO THAT APPELLEE/DEFENDANT'S PROPOSALS FOR 16 WeStlaWN0XT © 2014 Thomson Reuters. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. 1 EFTA01193709