MURRAY B. SILVERSTEIN, CYNTHIA A. MIKOS, etc. v. PUBLIC MEDICAL ASSISTANCE TRUST FUND, et al.

Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA MURRAY B. SILVERSTEIN, CYNTHIA A. MIKOS, etc., & NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED Appellants, v. CASE NO. 1D04-1116 PUBLIC MEDICAL ASSISTANCE TRUST FUND, et al., Appellees. _____________________________/ Opinion filed August 31, 2005. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County. L. Ralph Smith, Judge. John R. Blue, Esq., Sylvia H. Walbolt, Esq., and Annette M. Lang, Esq. of Carlton, Fields, P.A., St. Petersburg for Murray B. Silverstein, P.A. and Cynthia A. Mikos, P.A.; Larry D. Simpson, Esq. of Judkins, Simpson, High & Villeneuve, Tallahassee for Broad and Cassel, for Appellants. Diane D. Tremor, Esq. and Chris H. Bentley, Esq. of Rose, Sundstrom & Bentley, LLP, Tallahassee for Tallahassee Orthopedic Surgery Partners, Ltd.; Mercer K. Clarke, Esq. of Clarke, Silverglate, Campbell, Williams & Montgomery, Miami for Quest Diagnostics Clinical Laboratories, Inc.; Mark A. Hendricks, Esq. of Panza, Mauer & Maynard, P.A., Ft. Lauderdale for HealthSouth Corporation; Robert R. Hearn, Esq. of Zuckerman, Spaeder, LLP, Tampa for Laboratory Corporation of America, for Appellees. PER CURIAM. Appellants, Murray B. Silverstein, P.A. and Cynthia A. Mikos, P.A., contend that the trial court erred in declining to apply a multiplier to the class action attorneys fee award. While we may disagree with the trial court s decision, we are unable to say that the court abused its discretion in so ruling. See Jones & Granger v. Johnson, 788 So. 2d 381, 385 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) ( In reviewing a decision of the trial court under the abuse of discretion standard, our mere disagreement with the reasoning of the trial court is not sufficient for reversal. ); Pellar v. Granger Asphalt Paving, Inc., 687 So. 2d 282, 285 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (noting that a trial court s order must be affirmed if reasonable people could differ as to the propriety of the court s action) (citing Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)). Accordingly, we AFFIRM. ALLEN, LEWIS and HAWKES, JJ., CONCUR. 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.