MARIE PIERRE
v.
JOSHUA HONORE
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.
A trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying attorney's fees to both parties when the litigation ends in a tie with each party prevailing in part and losing in part on significant issues.
[1] A trial court may properly deny attorney's fees to both parties in a contract action when neither party has prevailed and the litigation ends in a tie with each party pre…
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“when the litigation 'ends in a tie,' with each party 'prevailing in part and losing in part on the significant issues,' the trial court is well within its discretion to deny attorney's fees to both parties.”
Citation to Schoenlank v. Schoenlank, 128 So. 3d 118, 121 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)
Marie Pierre appealed from a County Court decision in Miami-Dade County regarding a contract dispute with Joshua Honore. The trial court denied attorn…
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.
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed October 1, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D25-0357 Lower Tribunal No. 23-113384-CC-23 ________________
Marie Pierre, Appellant,
vs.
Joshua Honore, Appellee.
An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Chiaka Ihekwaba, Judge.
Keystone Law Firm, P.A., and Frank Wolland and Eliezer S. Poupko, for appellant.
Gregory D. Curtis, for appellee.
Before LOGUE, GORDO and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
2 Affirmed. See Schoenlank v. Schoenlank, 128 So. 3d 118, 121 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (“[W]hen the litigation ‘ends in a tie,’ with each party ‘prevailing in part and losing in part on the significant issues,’ the trial court is well within its discretion to deny attorney’s fees to both parties.” (quoting Loy v. Loy, 904 So. 2d 482, 484 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005))); Zhang v. D.B.R. Asset Mgmt., Inc., 878 So. 2d 386, 387 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (“A trial court may properly determine that neither party has prevailed in a contract action under compelling circumstances.”); M.A. Hajianpour, M.D., P.A. v. Khosrow Maleki, P.A., 975 So. 2d 1288, 1290 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (“[I]t appears that the parties battled to a draw. It is not an abuse of discretion to decline to award attorney’s fees when a court determines that neither party prevailed.”).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Yi Lin Zhang v. D.B.R. Asset Mgmt., Inc., 878 So. 2d 386 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)
- Bradley v. Yates, 975 So. 2d 1288 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
- Schoenlank v. Sylma Schoenlank, 128 So. 3d 118 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)