NORMAN SEIGLER AND MARIJANE SEIGLER, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
THE GENERAL LEISURE CORPORATION AND ST. PAUL FIRE AND MARINE INSURANCE COMPANY, A CORPORATION, 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.
The appellants challenged the trial court's award of costs against them following litigation with the appellees. The court reversed and remanded, finding mathematical error in the cost calculation and improper taxation of overhead charges for expert witnesses.
The trial court erred in both respects. The mathematical calculation on the face of the motion was incorrect, and taxation of the additional $25.00 for each expert witness for overhead, clerical and administrative expenses was improper as unsupported by any legal authority.
[1] An appellate court cannot consider evidence or arguments not contained within the official record on appeal.
[2] A trial court's taxation of costs must be supported by evidence within the record.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“It is well settled that an appellate court in making its determination must rely on the record rather than statements contained in the brief.”
Establishes the principle that appellate review is limited to materials in the formal record, preventing consideration of the Applied Technical Services bill not in the record.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court was asked to tax costs including expert witness fees of $726.82 each for Jim Hills and Richard Combs, court reporter fees of $131.25, …
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 Record On Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
SPECTOR, Judge.
The only question presented by this appeal is whether the lower court erred in taxing to the plaintiff-appellant costs in relation to certain expert witnesses.
The record on appeal consists of the motion to tax costs, written objections to the motion, the order taxing costs, petition to this court for review of the cost judgment, notice of interlocutory appeal, assignments of error and directions to the clerk. Based solely on this record, it is clear that the court must have erred in calculating the costs to be taxed. The motion requested the following costs to be taxed: Jim Hills — expert witness fee $726.82 Richard Combs — expert witness fee 726.81 Court Reporter 131.25 Witness fee — Edward Pike, Jr. 7.50 Witness fee — Gregory Braddock 7.50 Sheriff’s service 10.00 1,609.88 The lower court in its order reduced the expert witness fees to $100.00, allowed $25.00 to each witness for overhead, clerical and administrative expenses, and came up with $1,186.30. There is no evidence in the record to support this finding. In fact, based on the face of the motion, if you reduce the expert witness fee of $726.82 to $100.00 for each witness, the amount to be taxed is more in the range of $400.00. Appellees in their brief attempt to justify the $1,609.88 judgment based on a bill presented to them by Applied Technical Services, Inc., for service rendered.
However, this bill is not a part of the record and appellants allege that they never saw the bill until after the notice of appeal had been filed. There are numerous cases holding that an appellate court cannot go outside the record in determining the correctness of a lower court’s order. It is well settled that an appellate court in making its determination must rely on the record rather than statements contained in the brief. It appears on the face of the record tha. there was an obvious mathematical mistake in the computation of the costs to be taxed. Appellants also contend it was error to tax as costs the $25.00 incurred by each of the expert witnesses for overhead, clerical and administrative expenses.
We agree. We are unaware of any authority for the taxation of such items as separate costs and appellees have pointed to none.
Accordingly, the taxation of the additional $25.00 for each expert witness was error.
Reversed and remanded for the entry of a new cost judgment consistent herewith. RAWLS, C. J., and WIGGINTON, JOHN T., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Centex-Rooney Constr. Co., Inc. v. Martin Cnty., 725 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…meals), equipment, postage and freight, equipment maintenance, printing, communication charges, temporary help, documents processing, graphics and similar administrative expenses were improperly taxed as costs. See Seigler v. General Leisure Corp., 289 So. 2d 429, 430 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)(over-head, clerical, and administrative expenses incurred by experts not taxable as costs). On remand, we direct that these expenses be deducted from the total. As to the fees for Norman Nelson, owner of Building Systems RX…
-
Bolton v. Bolton, 412 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)…xeroxing and $3.85 postage for documents furnished to her pursuant to discovery, and of $57.00 for a copy of a deposition not used at trial. The office expenses of counsel for appellee are not recoverable as costs. Seigler v. General Leisure Corp., 289 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). See Professional Computer Management, Inc. v. Tampa Wholesale Liquor Co., Inc., 374 So. 2d 626 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). Nor are copies of depositions recoverable in Florida. Davis v. Mandau, 400 So. 2d 89, 90 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); Paul…
-
R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Clayton, 177 So. 3d 319 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)…n taxable costs. We agree with Appellant as to the $3,150 in fees paid to Dr. Ahluwalia for various clerical and administrative tasks he performed, including time spent printing, organizing, and stapling documents. See Seigler v. Gen. Leisure Corp., 289 So. 2d 429, 430 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974) (agreeing with the appellants that the trial court erred in taxing as costs the $25 incurred by each of the expert witnesses for overhead, clerical, and administrative expenses); see also Centex-Rooney Constr. Co., Inc. v. M…