WILLIAM H. GOODFRIEND, APPELLANT,
v.
ELBERT J. DRUCK ET AL., 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.
Trial court's award of appellate attorney's fees was reversed because the promissory note lacked express language authorizing such fees and the trial court failed to follow the procedural requirements of Rule 3.16(e), F.A.R.
Attorney's fees for appellate services are not allowable unless the contractual document contains express language authorizing them.
[1] Attorney's fees for appellate services are not recoverable under a contract unless the contract expressly authorizes recovery of such fees.
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“attorney's fees on appeal are not allowable unless there is express language to that effect in the contractual document executed by the parties”
Court explaining the controlling legal standard from Ohio Realty Investment Corp. v. Southern Bank of West Palm Beach
Goodfriend appealed a judgment in which the trial court awarded attorney's fees for services in the appellate court, including the Supreme Court, base…
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 Attorney'S Fees On Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of the briefs and record we are of the opinion that the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees for services in the appellate court (including the Supreme Court) was contrary to Rule 3.16(e), F.A.R.; said rule sets forth the manner in which attorney’s fees may be sought for service in the appellate court and particularly the requirement for the determination as to the allowance of such fee to be made by the appellate court. The record does not demonstrate that this procedure was followed.
In addition and perhaps of greater significance in the disposition of this appeal is the fact that under the recent decision of the Supreme Court in Ohio Rlty. Inv. Corp. v. Southern Bk of West Palm Beach, Fla. 1974, 300 So. 2d 679, attorney’s fees on appeal are not allowable unless there is express language to that effect in the contractual document executed by the parties. The instant case involves a promissory note which contained no provision for attorney’s fees on appeal.
Accordingly, the final judgment is reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court with respectful directions to modify said judgment deleting the allowance of attorney’s fees for services in the appellate courts in conformance herewith.
Reversed and remanded.
CROSS, MAGER, and DOWNEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brown v. Fin. Indem. Co., 366 So. 2d 1273 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)…Florida Statutes (1977),1 no allowance can be made for appellate attorney’s fees incurred by the indemnitee. Petitioners rely upon Ohio Realty Investment Corp. v. Southern Bank of West Palm Beach, 300 So. 2d 679 (Fla.1974), and Goodfriend v. Druck, 309 So. 2d 236 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), as well as Lake Killarney Apartments, Inc. v. Estate of Thompson, 283 So. 2d 102 (Fla.1973), and Sunbeam Enterprises, Inc. v. Upthegrove, 316 So. 2d 34 (Fla.1975). Respondent, on the other hand, contends that those cases are no…
Authorities Cited
- Ohio Realty Inv. Corp. v. S. Bank OF W. Palm Beach, 300 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 1974)