SHERIFF OF ALACHUA COUNTY, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
LARRY HARDIE, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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 Sheriff appealed a judgment dismissing a forfeiture proceeding and awarding the appellee Hardie restitution, damages, and attorney's fees. The court affirmed the restitution and damages awards but reversed the attorney's fees award, finding no contractual or statutory basis under Florida law to support it.
The court affirmed the awards of $1,180.00 in damages and $50.00 in costs, finding the trial court's exercise of equitable power to order restitution was proper. However, the court reversed the $500.00 attorney's fees award, holding that attorney's fees may only be awarded upon a contractual or statutory basis, and the record did not support a finding that the action was frivolous under Section 57.105.
[1] A trial court possesses inherent power to correct its errors and may order restitution of property and damages to restore parties to their positions prior to an erroneous…
[2] A trial court's decision to order restitution will not be reversed absent a clear showing of abuse of discretion.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A trial court has "inherent power to correct its errors" and may, applying equitable principles, order restitution of property and damages when a judgment is reversed on appeal or when it is vacated or set aside by the trial court.”
Establishes the foundational legal principle supporting the trial court's authority to award restitution and damages.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Sheriff initiated a forfeiture proceeding against Hardie's 1968 Shelby Ford Cobra. The trial court dismissed the forfeiture proceeding for failure…
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 Fla. Stat. § 57.105 cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal from a final judgment dismissing a forfeiture proceeding for failure to prosecute and granting a motion for restitution, the appellant (Sheriff) contends that the lower court erred in assessing damages and attorney’s fees against his office. Appellee (Hardie) cross-appeals, contending that the amounts awarded both as damages and as attorney’s fees were inadequate. We agree with the Sheriff’s contention that it was error to award attorney’s fees and reverse as to that point only.
Having considered the Sheriff’s argument that restitution was improper in this case and Hardie’s argument that the award of $1,180.00 for restoration of his 1968 Shelby Ford Cobra was insufficient, we find merit with neither position. A trial court has “inherent power to correct its errors” and may, applying equitable principles, order restitution of property and damages when a judgment is reversed on appeal or when it is vacated or set aside by the trial court. Mann v. Thompson, 118 So. 2d 112, 114 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960).
If, as in this case, the trial court determines that restitution is necessary to restore the parties to the positions occupied prior to entry of the erroneous judgment, that decision will not be reversed absent a clear showing of abuse of discretion. Id. Because no such showing was made in this case, we affirm the lower court’s award of $1,180.00 in damages and $50.00 in costs to Hardie.
The Sheriff next contends that the lower court erred in awarding Hardie $500.00 in attorney’s fees; Hardie counters that the award was insufficient.
We agree with the Sheriff that the award was erroneous. Attorney’s fees may only be awarded if there is a contractual or statutory basis to support such an award. Suwannee County v. Garrison, 417 So. 2d 1070, 1071 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982).
Because there is no contractual basis for fees in this case, the award may stand only if justified under Section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1981), which provides that “[t]he court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee to the prevailing party in any civil action in which the court finds that there was a complete absence of a justiciable issue of either law or fact raised by the losing party” (e.s.).
This court has recently reiterated that “[i]n order to make an award of attorney’s fees under § 57.105, the court must find that the action is clearly devoid of merit both on the facts and the law, and that the action is so untenable as to be properly labeled ‘frivolous.’ ” All-Brite Sales Co. v. Roderick, 416 So. 2d 1202, 1203 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (e.s.).
Because the lower court failed to make any such finding and, even had it done so, given the record of this case, such a finding would clearly have been erroneous, we reverse that portion of the final judgment awarding attorney’s fees to Hardie.
Accordingly, this cause is AFFIRMED in part and REVERSED in part and remand ed to the lower court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
ERVIN, THOMPSON and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
City OF Miami Beach v. Bules, 479 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…rred in assessing attorney’s fees against the City. There is no statutory or contractual basis for an award of attorney’s fees in this case, nor were attorney’s fees specifically made a condition of the stay. See Sheriff of Alachua County v. Hardie, 433 So. 2d 15 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); City of Coral Gables v. Geary, 398 So. 2d 479 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Secondly, Buies was entitled to be compensated for the loss of use of his vessel occasioned by the appeal. This loss was clearly contemplated by the terms of the…
-
Mickler v. Graham, 611 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…ty Insur. Co., 410 So. 2d 501, 506 (Fla. 1982); Hirtreiter v. Donovan, 594 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 2d DCA1992); Harrison v. Rambuski, 567 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2d DCA1990); Warshaw v. Monroy, 515 So. 2d 307 (Fla. 3d DCA1987); Sheriff of Alachua County v. Hardie, 433 So. 2d 15, 16 (Fla. 1st DCA1983) (statutory award of attorney’s fees must be based on finding that the action is clearly devoid of merit on both the facts and law, and is so untenable as to be properly labeled “frivolous”); Suwannee County v. Garrison, 417 So…
-
Broad AND Cassel v. Newport Motel, Inc., 636 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)…DCA 1992); Harrison v. Rambuski, 567 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Personnel One, Inc. v. John Sommerer & Co., P.A., 564 So. 2d 1217, 1219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Warshaw v. Monroy, 515 So. 2d 307 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Sheriff of Alachua County v. Hardie, 433 So. 2d 15, 16 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983); Suwannee County v. Garrison, 417 So. 2d 1070, 1072-73 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Autorico, Inc. v. Government Employees Ins. Co., 398 So. 2d 485, 488 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Given the defective nature of the order under review and o…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Mann v. Thompson, 118 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 1st DCA 1960)
- Suwannee Cnty. v. Enoch E. Garrison, Jr., 417 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
- All-Brite Sales Co. v. Roderick, 416 So. 2d 1202 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)