HARDWARE IMAGINATION, INC., AND JEAN ROYE, INDIVIDUALLY, APPELLANTS,
v.
PAUL GROLL, INDIVIDUALLY AND HAROLD GROLL, INDIVIDUALLY, AND IN THEIR RIGHT AS SHAREHOLDERS OF HARDWARE IMAGINATION, INC., 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.
Court affirmed the stock valuation of $751,401 as supported by competent substantial evidence but reversed the attorney's fees award because Hardware was not the prevailing party on significant issues.
A stock valuation of $751,401 is affirmed where competent substantial evidence supports it, but attorney's fees are reversed because the prevailing party requirement was not satisfied.
[1] A prevailing party attorney's fees award under a contract provision requires the party to have prevailed on significant issues in the litigation, not merely to have been…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“an award of attorney's fees is not warranted each time there is litigation involving a contract which provides for prevailing party attorney's fees”
Court explaining that prevailing party status requires success on significant issues, not merely any litigation involving a fee-shifting contract
Paul and Harold Groll and Jean Roye, as personal representative of James Roye's estate, disputed the buyout value of Hardware Imagination, Inc. stock.…
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 Stock Valuation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Paul and Harold Groll, individually and on behalf of Hardware Imagination, Inc. (“Hardware”), appeal a final judgment valuing certain shares of Hardware stock at $751,401. Jean Roye, individually and in her capacity as personal representative of the estate of James Roye, also appeals the final judgments valuing the stock at $751,401 and awarding Hardware attorney’s fees.
We affirm the final judgment determining the buyout value of the Hardware stock because the record contains competent substantial evidence to support the $751,401 value placed on the stock. See CADD Ctrs. of Fla., Inc. v. Strickland, 851 So. 2d 756, 758 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (citation omitted)(reversing a final judgment because there was no competent substantial evidence to support the trial court’s valuation of stock). However, we reverse the final judgment awarding Hardware attorney’s fees because, under the facts of this case, the record does not support the trial court’s finding that Hardware was the prevailing party in the significant issue of the litigation. See KCIN, Inc. v. Canpro Inv., Ltd., 675 So. 2d 222, 223 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)(holding that an award of attorney’s fees is not warranted each time there is litigation involving a contract which provides for prevailing party attorney’s fees).
Affirmed in part; reversed in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Kcin, Inc. v. Canpro Invs., Ltd., 675 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
- Cadd Ctrs. OF Fla., Inc. v. Strickland, 851 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)