UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, ETC.
v.
PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL GROUP, INC., ETC.
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.
An award of attorney's fees, whether based on contract or statute, is reviewed under the abuse of discretion standard, and discretion is abused only when the judicial action is arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable.
[1] An award of attorney's fees, whether based on contract or statute, is reviewed under the abuse of discretion standard, and discretion is abused only when the judicial act…
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“Discretion is abused only 'when the judicial action is arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable, which is another way of saying that discretion is abused only where no reasonable [person] would take the view adopted by the trial court.'”
Definition of abuse of discretion standard applied to attorney's fee awards
United Automobile Insurance Company appealed an attorney's fee award made by the trial court against Professional Medical Group, Inc.…
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.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Glob. Extreme, Inc. v. Advanced Aircraft Ctr., Inc., 122 So. 3d 487, 490 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (holding: “The standard of review for an award of attorney's fees, whether based on contract or statute, is abuse of discretion”) (citing Universal Beverage Holdings, Inc. v. Merkin, 902 So. 2d 288, 290 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)). See also Frances v. State, 970 So. 2d 806, 813 (Fla. 2007) (observing: “Under the abuse of discretion standard, ‘[d]iscretion is abused only ‘when the judicial action is arbitrary, fanciful, or unreasonable, which is another way of saying that discretion is abused only where no reasonable [person] would take the view adopted by the trial court.’”) (quoting Trease v. State, 768 So. 2d 1050, 1053 n. 2 (Fla. 2000)) (quotations omitted).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Trease v. State, 768 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 2000)
- Frances v. State, 970 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 2007)
- Universal Beverages Holdings, Inc. v. Merkin, 902 So. 2d 288 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- Global Xtreme, Inc. v. Advanced Aircraft Ctr., Inc., 122 So. 3d 487 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)