FERRIS WALLER AND COUNTRY VILLAGE FLEA MARKET, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANTS/CROSS-APPELLEES,
v.
STEVEN A. BAXLEY, SHEILA K. BAXLEY AND FLORENCE KEEN, APPELLEES/CROSS-APPELLANTS, AND GOLDEN LAKES, LTD., A FLORIDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, COUNTRY MEADOW ESTATES, LTD., A FLORIDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND CLIFFORD HAM, 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.
Ferris Waller and his limited partnership appealed a judgment finding them liable for trespass, nuisance, and negligence. The appellate court affirmed the liability and damages but reversed in part regarding cost awards to the prevailing parties, holding that the trial court erred in denying certain costs including jury view advancement, court reporter per diem, and sales tax on attorney fees.
The appellate court affirmed the jury verdict and damages award against Waller but reversed the trial court's denial of three categories of costs: (1) the $77.50 jury view advancement is recoverable under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.520; (2) the $935.00 court reporter per diem is recoverable because the reporter served a useful purpose at trial; and (3) the $883.33 sales tax on attorney fees is recoverable under Florida Statutes section 57.071(3).
[1] A jury verdict finding defendants liable for trespass, nuisance, and negligence, along with an award of damages, will be affirmed if the appellate court finds no merit in…
[2] A prevailing party is entitled to recover the advance paid for a jury view as costs.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.520 states that the advance paid by the movant for a jury view shall be taxed as costs if the movant prevails.”
Establishes the statutory basis for awarding jury view advancement costs to prevailing parties
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Baxleys and Mrs. Keen were plaintiffs in a case against Ferris Waller and Country Village Flea Market for trespass, nuisance, and negligence. A ju…
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 Nuisance cases and more on FLexlaw
RYDER, Acting Chief Judge.
Ferris Waller and his limited partnership, Country Village Flea Market, challenge the trial court’s judgment entered on a jury verdict finding them liable for trespass, nuisance and negligence and the award of damages to the Baxleys and Mrs. Keen. Because we find no merit in any of the seven issues raised by the Waller interests, we affirm the trial court’s judgment with regard to the jury verdict and damages.
The Baxleys and Mrs. Keen seek review of the trial court’s denial of certain costs while the court awarded them other costs. We affirm as to all costs awarded appel-lees. However, we hold that the Baxleys and Mrs. Keen are entitled to the costs denied them, therefore, we reverse the court below as to those and remand the case to correct the judgment regarding costs.
The Baxleys and Mrs. Keen were denied reimbursement of $77.50 which they advanced for a jury view. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.520 states that the advance paid by the movant for a jury view shall be taxed as costs if the movant prevails. The Baxleys and Mrs. Keen were the prevailing parties in this case, and should have been awarded this advance.
Mrs. Keen and the Baxleys were also denied an amount of $935.00 for the per diem attendance of the court reporter at trial. Pursuant to section 57.071(2) Florida Statutes (1989), and Wilkins v. Superx Drugs of Florida, Inc., 232 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970), appellees are entitled to these costs because the court reporter served a “useful purpose” at trial.
Finally, Mrs. Keen and the Baxleys were denied their claim of $883.33 for sales tax which they paid on a portion of their attor ney’s fees. Section 57.071(3), Florida Statutes (1989), specifically states that any sales tax shall be awarded to any party who is awarded costs. Because appellees were awarded costs in this case, they are entitled to the sales tax incurred on the portion of their attorney fees, as a result of the Florida service tax. See also Hoopes v. Hoopes, 525 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988).
It was error for the trial court to deny the costs described above. The judgment is affirmed with regard to the jury verdict and damage award, but the case is remanded for the trial court to correct the judgment regarding costs awarded to the Bax-leys and Mrs. Keen as set forth in this opinion.
Affirmed in part and remanded for correction of judgment.
DANAHY and FRANK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Carson v. Quaile, 616 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…each cost would have served a useful purpose at trial. Third, we agree with appellants’ argument that the trial court erred in awarding court reporter fees for attendance at hearings and costs for transcripts of the hearings. See Waller v. Baxley, 565 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Appellee had the burden to show the transcripts of the hearings would have served a useful purpose at trial. The trial court’s refusal to allow appellee argument to demonstrate the purpose of these transcripts leaves the record w…
Authorities Cited
- Hoopes v. Davidson Hoopes, 525 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)
- Wilkins v. Superx Drugs OF Fla., Inc., 232 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)