Lodestar Amount

33 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Orlando Reg'l Med. Ctr., Inc. v. Boleslaus J. Chmielewski
  573 So. 2d 876· Fla. 5th DCA· 1990-12-06 ·cited 57×
  Orlando Regional Medical Center appealed a jury verdict finding it 77% liable for medical malpractice in a case involving a puncture wound to a patient's foot where a foreign object was not discovered. The court affirmed the liability finding under apparent agency doctrine but re
• Joyce v. Federated Nat'l Ins. Co.
  228 So. 3d 1122· Fla.· 2017-10-19 ·cited 38×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that trial courts may apply contingency fee multipliers to attorney's fee awards in insurance coverage disputes without requiring "rare" or "exceptional" circumstances, reaffirming state precedent and rejecting the federal lodestar approach's strong
• Fleming v. Cnty. OF Kane
  898 F.2d 553· 7th Cir.· 1990-03-27 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence regarding the propriety of the Orchard Road project, and affirmed the denial of the motion for a new trial, but modified the damages award for lost wages.
• DiFILIPPO v. Tullio Morizio
  759 F.2d 231· 2d Cir.· 1985-04-05 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a district court cannot reduce a lodestar attorney's fee award based solely on the low amount of damages recovered if the award is typical for similar cases, and that the reasonableness of hours expended must be judged by private bar standards.
• Broward Cnty. v. LaPOINTE
  685 So. 2d 889· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-11-13 ·cited 24×
  In this eminent domain appeal, Broward County challenged the trial court's award of attorney's fees to the LaPointes' counsel in a property condemnation dispute involving environmental contamination issues. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's calculatio
• McCARTHY Bros. Co. v. Tilbury Constr., Inc.
  849 So. 2d 7· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-03-10 ·cited 23×
  McCarthy Brothers appealed a jury verdict awarding Tilbury Construction $374,709.00 for breach of a subcontract, and attorney's fees awards to both Tilbury and surety Nobel Insurance. The appellate court reversed the damages award as excessive, reduced the attorney's fee multipli
• River Bridge Corp. v. Am. Somax Ventures
  76 So. 3d 986· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-11-30 ·cited 19×
  River Bridge Corporation appealed a judgment and attorney's fee award in favor of American Somax Ventures. The appellate court reversed 85% of the underlying judgment for breach of a right of first refusal claim due to speculative damages testimony. The court held that the trial
• Ivy McFADDEN v. Detective Juan Sanchez
  710 F.2d 907· 2d Cir.· 1983-06-14 ·cited 18×
  Punitive damages in a section 1983 action must be assessed individually against each defendant, both as to liability and amount, and cannot be jointly assessed.
• Corder v. Gates
  947 F.2d 374· 9th Cir.· 1991-10-16 ·cited 17×
  A district court may not reduce an attorney's fee award simply because the plaintiff did not prevail against all named defendants when the claims are related and the plaintiff achieved substantial relief.
• Sierra Club v. Anne M. Gorsuch
  684 F.2d 972· D.C. Cir.· 1982-07-16 ·cited 16×
  The court held that a downward adjustment to the lodestar amount for attorneys' fees is appropriate when a litigant loses on every issue.
• Gilmere v. City OF Atlanta
  864 F.2d 734· 11th Cir.· 1989-01-30 ·cited 13×
  The court held that in a § 1983 wrongful death case, federal courts must apply state law for damages unless inconsistent with federal law, and the district court's award was inadequate.
• Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Laguerre
  259 So. 3d 169· Fla. 3d DCA· 2018-08-22 ·cited 10×
  A trial court does not abuse its discretion in awarding a contingency fee multiplier when the award is supported by competent, substantial evidence under the Rowe and Quanstrom factors, and contingency fee multipliers are not limited to rare and exceptional circumstances. The rel
• Tullos v. Tullos
  37 So. 3d 355· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-05-21 ·cited 8×
  The trial court erred in awarding less than the stipulated attorney's fees without making specific findings to support the reduction.
• Taylor v. Taylor
  746 So. 2d 577· Fla. 1st DCA· 1999-12-21 ·cited 8×
  A Florida appellate court reversed an award of $21,292 in attorney's fees against the mother in a child custody modification proceeding, holding that the trial court misapplied Rosen v. Rosen and that the facts did not support sanctions for frivolous or harassing litigation.
• Greenhaw v. Lubbock Cnty. Bev. Ass'n
  721 F.2d 1019· 5th Cir.· 1983-12-27 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in certifying the class or bifurcating the trial, and that the evidence presented was sufficient to support the jury's findings on liability, injury, and damages.
• Hamilton v. Ford Motor Co.
  936 So. 2d 1203· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-09-01 ·cited 6×
  Homeowners appealed a trial court's attorney's fees award in a lemon law case brought under both the Florida Lemon Law Act and the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. The court reversed and remanded, finding the trial court improperly relied on a rejected settlement offer and defense exp
• Hasbrouck v. Texaco, Inc.
  879 F.2d 632· 9th Cir.· 1989-07-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while enhancement of attorney fees for the risk of loss in this antitrust action was proper, enhancement for work on the fee petition was an abuse of discretion. The contingent fee agreement did not limit the award.
• Meli Inv. Corp. v. O.R.
  621 So. 2d 676· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-07-06 ·cited 5×
  The appellate court reviewed the trial court's application of a risk multiplier to an award of attorneys fees for tenants who successfully counterclaimed for wrongful eviction, harassment, and AIDS discrimination against their landlord.
• United States Sec. Ins. Co. v. Lapour
  617 So. 2d 347· Fla. 3d DCA· 1993-04-13 ·cited 5×
  In this attorney's fees appeal arising from a PIP insurance dispute, the court reversed the trial court's application of a 2.0 multiplier to the lodestar amount, holding that a multiplier is not automatic when counsel is hired on a contingent fee basis and is inappropriate where
• Superior Ins. Co. v. Cordle
  851 So. 2d 207· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-06-26 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court reversed a trial court's award of attorney fees, finding that a "contingent risk" multiplier was improperly applied. The court clarified that a client's indigence does not make a fee arrangement contingent for the purpose of applying such multipliers.
• Cann v. Carpenters' Pension Tr. Fund FOR N. Cal.
  989 F.2d 313· 9th Cir.· 1993-03-25 ·cited 4×
  The court held that ERISA's attorneys' fees provision does not allow for fees incurred during administrative proceedings prior to filing suit, nor does it allow for enhancement of fees to reflect a contingency risk.
• Gilleo v. City OF Ladue
  986 F.2d 1180· 8th Cir.· 1993-02-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that Ladue's sign ordinance is unconstitutional because it is content-based and not narrowly tailored to serve a compelling interest, but modified the attorneys' fee award by vacating the enhancement for contingency.
• Greseth v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs.
  604 So. 2d 530· Fla. 4th DCA· 1992-08-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that PERC erred in refusing to grant a hearing on attorney's fees when material facts were disputed, and that career service appeals fall into a category where contingent fee multipliers may be appropriate.
• Jacquelyn L. Morris v. Am. Nat'l CAN Corp.
  941 F.2d 710· 8th Cir.· 1991-08-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in terminating backpay at the time of the reinstatement offer and in its calculation of backpay damages, but did err in denying an enhancement for attorney fees based on the contingent risk of litigation.
• Moya v. Moya
  118 So. 3d 916· Fla. 3d DCA· 2013-07-31 ·cited 3×
  The court held that the trial court erred in awarding attorney's fees as a sanction without demonstrating compliance with statutory and case law requirements regarding financial resources and fee computation.
• Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Celestrin
  45 Fla. L. Weekly D2511· Fla. 3d DCA· 2021-03-24 ·cited 2×
  Universal Property & Casualty Insurance Company appealed a trial court's award of attorneys' fees to homeowners in a first-party water loss insurance claim. The appellate court affirmed the fee award but reversed and remanded to reduce billable hours by 13.2 hours that were impro
• Bayer v. Global Renaissance Arts, Inc.
  898 So. 2d 995· Fla. 2d DCA· 2005-03-04 ·cited 2×
  Bayer and Turra appealed a supplemental final judgment awarding them attorney's fees, but the trial court failed to provide adequate findings on the amount awarded. The appellate court reversed and remanded, directing assignment to a different judge because the trial court's resi
• Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Casanas
  336 So. 3d 746· Fla. 3d DCA· 2021-10-27 ·cited 1×
  Citizens Property Insurance Company appealed a trial court's award of attorneys' fees and costs totaling $150,600 in a homeowners' insurance dispute where the underlying settlement was only $35,000. The appellate court reversed the fee award, finding it was unsupported by compete
• City of Daytona Beach v. A.B.
  304 So. 3d 395· Fla. 5th DCA· 2020-10-01
  This appeal concerns attorney's fees awarded under Florida's Joe Carlucci Uniform Firearms Act (section 790.33) in a case where A.B. sued the City of Daytona Beach to recover firearms seized during a mental health crisis commitment. The court affirms the 1.5 contingency fee multi
• Edgar v. Firuta
  165 So. 3d 758· Fla. 3d DCA· 2015-05-20
  Patricia Edgar appeals from a parenting plan and an $87,000 fee award entered on remand. The Third District Court of Appeal reverses both orders, finding the trial court erroneously refused to allow Edgar to testify telephonically and failed to make adequate factual findings rega
• Hawkins Sandblasting, Inc. v. Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc.
  668 So. 2d 1042· Fla. 1st DCA· 1996-02-15
  Hawkins Sandblasting appeals a judgment requiring it to indemnify Jacksonville Shipyards for attorneys' fees, defense costs, and settlement amounts arising from an employee injury claim. The court affirms, holding that the indemnification clause in the subcontract was broad enoug
• Richardson v. Merkle
  646 So. 2d 289· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-12-02
  The court held that entitlement to attorneys' fees under section 57.105 is affirmed, but the application of a contingency risk multiplier to such an award is improper.
• Carmichael v. Birmingham SAW Works
  814 F.2d 590· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-13
  The district court abused its discretion by failing to adjust the lodestar amount upward to account for the delay in payment of attorney's fees.