MARTIN COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
POLIVKA PAVING, INC., D/B/A POLIVKA SURFACE ENGINEERING, LTD., 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.
Florida appellate court reversed and remanded attorney's fees award in construction contract dispute, requiring trial court to recalculate fees by separating time spent on unsuccessful home office overhead damages claim from successful claims.
When a significant aspect of an underlying case is reversed on appeal, the trial court must reconsider the attorney's fees award by evaluating whether time spent on unsuccessful claims can be separated from successful claims.
[1] When a trial court awards attorney's fees to a prevailing party but a significant aspect of the underlying judgment is reversed on appeal, the trial court must recalculat…
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“the trial court "must evaluate the relationship between the successful and unsuccessful claims and determine whether the investigation and prosecution of the successful claims can be separated from the unsuccessful claims."”
Citing Fla. Patient's Comp. Fund v. Rowe for the standard applicable when recalculating attorney's fees after partial reversal.
Martin County sued Polivka Paving for construction-related damages. The trial court awarded home office overhead damages and attorney's fees to the pr…
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 Lodestar Calculation cases and more on FLexlaw
In Martin County v. Polivka Paving, Inc., 44 So.3d 126 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), we reversed that portion of a final judgment awarding home office overhead damages and remanded for the entry of an amended final judgment. This case is an appeal from an award of attorney’s fees. Although the appellee/plaintiff remains the prevailing party entitled to an award of attorney’s fees, the reversal on a significant aspect of the underlying case requires the trial court to reconsider the amount of attorney’s fees awarded; the trial court “must evaluate the relationship between the successful and unsuccessful claims and determine whether the investigation and prosecution of the successful claims can be separated from the unsuccessful claims.” Fla. Patient’s Comp. Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145, 1151 (Fla.1985). On remand, the trial court should attempt to determine whether the plaintiffs attorneys spent a separate and distinct amount of time on the issue of home office overhead damages that then can be backed out of the lodestar. We agree with the trial court that some contingency risk multiplier was appropriate in this case, but on remand the trial court should evaluate how the adjusted result obtained impacts the amount of the multiplier.
Reversed and remanded.
STEVENSON, GROSS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Patient's Comp. Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985)
- Martin Cnty. v. Polivka Paving, Inc., 44 So. 3d 126 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)