ENVIROCYCLE SOLUTIONS, INC., AND DANIEL J. LONGWORTH, APPELLANTS,
v.
CARPET INN OF SARASOTA, INC. A/K/A CARPET INN, 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.
Envirocycle Solutions and Daniel Longworth appealed a summary judgment in favor of Carpet Inn under Florida's Securities and Investor Protection Act. The appellate court affirmed the summary judgment on the merits but reversed the attorney's fees award and remanded because the trial court failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing on the reasonableness of fees despite detailed objections.
The court affirmed the summary judgment on the merits and the trial court's entitlement to award reasonable attorney's fees, but reversed the fee award and remanded for an evidentiary hearing because the trial court failed to conduct a hearing on the reasonableness of fees or make findings addressing Envirocycle's specific objections.
[1] A trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine reasonable attorney's fees when objections to the fee request are properly raised.
[2] A party challenging the reasonableness of attorney's fees is entitled to an opportunity to present evidence and conduct discovery regarding the fee request.
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“Envirocycle does not contest Carpet Inn's entitlement to "reasonable" attorney's fees under section 517.211(6). However, when Carpet Inn's counsel filed his affidavit regarding the fees requested, Envirocycle filed detailed objections to certain entries in the affidavit for a variety of reasons challenging the sufficiency of the information provided and the reasonableness of the amount of fees requested.”
Establishes that while the defendant did not challenge the right to fees, they provided specific objections that the trial court was obligated to address.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarpet Inn sued Envirocycle Solutions and Daniel J. Longworth under chapter 517, Florida Statutes, alleging securities violations. The trial court gra…
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 Florida Securities And Investor Protection Act cases and more on FLexlaw
FULMER, Chief Judge.
Carpet Inn sued Envirocycle Solutions and Daniel J. Longworth under chapter 517, Florida Statutes (1999 and 2000), the Florida Securities and Investor Protection Act. Carpet Inn prevailed on summary judgment. We reverse only the award of attorney’s fees to Carpet Inn because the trial court failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing. In all other respects, we affirm.
Envirocycle does not contest Carpet Inn’s entitlement to “reasonable” attorney’s fees under section 517.211(6). However, when Carpet Inn’s counsel filed his affidavit regarding the fees requested, En-virocycle filed detailed objections to certain entries in the affidavit for a variety of reasons challenging the sufficiency of the information provided and the reasonableness of the amount of fees requested. In its written objections, Envirocycle requested that the court either conduct an evidentiary hearing or give Envirocycle an opportunity to depose Carpet Inn’s counsel concerning the details of the services rendered. The trial court did neither. Instead, the trial court entered a final judgment that included an award of all attorney’s fees requested by Carpet Inn but made no findings as to hourly rate or number of hours reasonably expended. The trial court also failed to make any findings addressing the objections raised. Therefore, we are unable to determine if the trial court considered the objections raised by Envirocycle or, if considered, on what basis the trial court determined that the objections were without merit. We therefore remand for the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing on attorney’s fees. See Fla. Patient’s Comp. Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. '
DAVIS and CANADY, JJ„ Concur.