FLORIDA HOMES CONSTRUCTION CO., INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
EXECU*SYSTEMS OF CENTRAL FLORIDA, INC., AND SEMVEST CORPORATION, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's attorney's fee award, finding no clear showing of abuse of discretion.
Appellant, successful in foreclosing a mechanic's lien, was awarded $1,000 in attorney's fees. Appellant argued this amount was insufficient for the t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Mechanic'S Lien Foreclosure cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, Judge.
Appellant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in awarding it only $1,000 for attorney’s fees in its successful action to foreclose a mechanic’s lien. We affirm.
Where the trial court is authorized to award attorney’s fees, such award being within the sound discretion of the court, the fees will not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of a clear showing of an abuse of that discretion. Bryan and Sons v. Klefstad, 265 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972). Appellant contends that the fee is insufficient for the time expended, and that the trial court did not consider the factors set forth in Florida Bar Code of Professional Responsibility DR 2-106, in determining the amount of the fee.
Appellant’s argument must fail because there is nothing in the record to sustain its position. It argues only that the attorney expended 28V2 hours for which the allowance of $1,000 is inadequate. We agree that the hourly allowance is low, but it is not so inadequate as to itself demonstrate an abuse of discretion. The trial court had the right to consider the various elements set forth in the canon and to assign to each such weight as he deemed appropriate. Appellant fails to demonstrate that the trial court did not do so. Appellant having failed to demonstrate error, the judgment below is
AFFIRMED.
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr. and SHARP, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tiedeman v. City OF Miami, 529 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…, Inc. on the cross appeal. See Bill Rivers Trailers, Inc. v. Miller, 489 So. 2d 1139, 1143 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Hanlon v. A.P. Clark Motors, Inc., 487 So. 2d 427, 427 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Florida Homes Constr. Co. v. Execu*Sys. of Cent. Fla., Inc., 393 So. 2d 648 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). The final order awarding attorney’s fees to the City of Miami under Section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1987), is reversed upon a holding that insufficient attorney time record documentation was adduced below to support such an…
Authorities Cited
- Bryan & Sons Corp. v. Sivert Klefstad, 265 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972)