11851 SKYLAKE PL #H TEMPLE TERRACE, LLC
v.
TURLINGTON
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.
When a prevailing party in a landlord-tenant action relies on nondiscretionary statutory or contractual fee provisions, the trial court must award fees and costs, with discretion limited to determining reasonableness of the amount.
[1] When a prevailing party in litigation relies on a nondiscretionary statutory or contractual provision for attorney's fees, the trial court lacks discretion to deny the fe…
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 discretion of the trial court exists only to the extent of determining the reasonableness of the amount in light of the circumstances”
Citing Villa Sorrento, Inc. v. Elden regarding mandatory fee awards under statute
Skylake, the prevailing party after a bench trial in a landlord-tenant dispute, timely moved for attorney's fees and costs based on section 83.49(3)(c…
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 Lease cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
11851 SKYLAKE PL #H TEMPLE TERRACE, LLC,
Appellant,
v.
ROBERT MADISON TURLINGTON,
Appellee.
No. 2D2024-2302
August 13, 2025
Appeal from the County Court for Hillsborough County; James Giardina, Judge.
Andrew J. Wit of Jennis Morse, Tampa, for Appellant.
No appearance for Appellee.
ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, Judge.
11851 Skylake Pl #H Temple Terrace, LLC (Skylake), appeals the trial court's unelaborated order denying its motion for attorney's fees and costs. After a careful review of the record, we are at a loss to understand why the court denied the motion. Skylake is undoubtedly the prevailing party following the bench trial in this matter, it timely moved for fees and costs, and it relied on at least two nondiscretionary bases for recovering fees and costs that do not require formal entry of judgment—section 83.49(3)(c), Florida Statutes (2024), and paragraph 29 of the first Lease
We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings. In doing so, we are mindful that Skylake has not provided us with a transcript of the hearing on its motion.1 We are not able to address whether the court abused its discretion in denying permissive fees as the record is insufficient to find an abuse of discretion. . . . [H]ere, the transcript may have shed light on the court's reasons for choosing not to award fees to the plaintiff. Maybe not. In any case, we will not speculate on the trial court's rationale used when it exercised its discretion. I-95 Motorsports, Inc. v. Goldberg, 155 So. 3d 449, 450 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015).
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
LaROSE and ATKINSON, JJ., Concur.
Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- I-95 Motorsports, Inc. v. Goldberg, 155 So. 3d 449 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)
- MacKenzie v. Centex Homes, 281 So. 3d 621 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019)
- Villa Sorrento, Inc. v. Elden, 458 So. 2d 1177 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)