COUNTY WASTE, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
PUBLIC STORAGE MANAGEMENT, INC., APPELLEE
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.
County Waste sued Public Storage for breach of contract, but the trial court granted summary judgment for Public Storage, finding no valid contract existed. Public Storage then sought attorney's fees under Florida Statutes § 57.105(2), which allows the prevailing party to recover fees when a contract contains an attorney's fee provision. The court reversed, holding that because no contract existed, neither party could recover attorney's fees.
No. Because the trial court determined that no contract existed, neither party could recover attorney's fees under the contract or the statute. The court reversed the attorney's fee award to Public Storage, holding that the non-existence of the contract precludes an award of attorney's fees.
[1] A determination that no contract exists precludes an award of attorney's fees under a contract provision, even if the statute would otherwise allow for reciprocal fees.
[2] A contract provision allowing attorney's fees to one party upon enforcement does not entitle the other party to attorney's fees under subsection 57.105(2), Florida Statut…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“If a contract contains a provision allowing attorney's fees to a party when he is required to take any action to enforce the contract, the court may also allow reasonable attorney's fees to the other party when that party prevails in any action, whether as plaintiff or defendant, with respect to the contract.”
Statement of the statutory provision at issue governing when attorney's fees may be awarded to a prevailing party.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCounty Waste sued Public Storage on a contract. Public Storage moved for summary judgment, arguing no contract had come into existence. The trial cour…
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 Breach Of Contract cases and more on FLexlaw
COPE, Judge.
County Waste, Inc. appeals an order of the trial court awarding attorney’s fees to Public Storage Management, Inc. pursuant to subsection 57.105(2), Florida Statutes (1989). We reverse.
County Waste sued Public Storage on a contract. Public Storage moved for summary judgment. The gist of defendant’s legal argument was that no contract had come into existence. The trial court agreed and entered summary judgment in defendant’s favor. The contractual document which had been the subject of the litigation contained a provision entitling County Waste to attorney’s fees in the event that it brought suit to enforce the agreement. Public Storage moved for an award of attorney’s fees as prevailing party under subsection 57.105(2), Florida Statutes (1989). The court awarded attorney’s fees to Public Storage and this appeal has ensued.
Subsection 57.105(2) provides in part, “[i]f a contract contains a provision allowing attorney’s fees to a party when he is required to take any action to enforce the contract, the court may also allow reasonable attorney’s fees to the other party when that party prevails in any action, whether as plaintiff or defendant, with respect to the contract.” Id. (emphasis added). It is evident that the intent of subsection 57.105(2) is to provide mutuality of attorney’s fee remedy in contract cases. The Florida Supreme Court has held that where a contract provides attorney’s fees to the prevailing party in the event of litigation, “the fact that a contract never existed precludes an award of attorney’s fees.” David v. Rickman, 568 So. 2d 922, 924 (Fla.1990). In the present case the contractual document is one-sided, providing only for an award of attorney’s fees to County Waste in the event of litigation. However, that formal distinction makes no difference in the analysis under David v. Rickman. Under that decision, once the trial court determined, as it did, that no contract existed, there could be no award of attorney’s fees under the contract. As County Waste would be unable to obtain attorney’s fees under the contract, Public Storage is not entitled to attorney’s fees under the statute.*
The attorney’s fee order is reversed.
*
If the contractual provision at issue here had had contractual mutuality with respect to attorney’s fees by allowing prevailing party attorney’s fees to either side (as was true in David v. Rickman), an award of attorney’s fees would have been precluded by that decision. The same result should obtain under the statute.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lanahan Lumber Co., Inc. v. McDEVITT & St. Co., 611 So. 2d 591 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…arty prevails in any action, whether as plaintiff or defendant, with respect to the contract. The intent of § 57.105(2) is to provide mutuality of attorney’s fees as a remedy in contract cases. County Waste, Inc. v. Public Storage Management, Inc., 582 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 3d DCA1991).…
-
Walls v. Quick & Reilly, Inc., 824 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…lidate choice-of-law provisions in a contract. Mazzoni. In Florida, the public policy consideration underlying section 57.105(5) “is to provide mutuality of attorney’s fee remedy in contract cases.” County Waste, Inc. v. Public Storage Mgmt., Inc., 582 So. 2d 87, 87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). Because New York law does not similarly provide for reciprocal attorney’s fees, except in cases involving landlord/tenant disputes, application of New York law in the instant case would obviously contravene Florida’s public p…
-
Perez v. Mem'l Sales, Inc., 655 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…tion for attorney’s fees, [*194] made and presented to the trial court pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1993), which essentially allows mutuality of attorney’s fees in contract cases. See County Waste, Inc. v. Public Storage Mgt., Inc., 582 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). Perez purchased a grave site and monument for his mother’s burial from Memorial. The contract plainly provided for a specific location for a grave for plaintiffs mother. Her body, however, was in fact buried in a plot some twen…
Authorities Cited
- Irv David v. Richman, 568 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 1990)