Association of School Consultants, Inc. v. Spillis Candela & Partners, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Association of School Consultants, Inc. v. Spillis Candela & Partners, Inc.

639 So. 2d 991, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 318, 1994 WL 19516

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 26, 1994

DocketNo. 92-1765

StatusPublished

This text of 639 So. 2d 991 (Association of School Consultants, Inc. v. Spillis Candela & Partners, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Association of School Consultants, Inc. v. Spillis Candela & Partners, Inc., 639 So. 2d 991, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 318, 1994 WL 19516 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. The standard of review of an order denying attorney’s fees requested under section 772.104, Florida Statutes (1987), is whether the trial court abused its discretion. See Foreman v. E.F. Hutton & Co., Inc., 568 So.2d 531, 532 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). Upon our review of the record in this case and the court’s extensive order, we conclude that appellant has not shown any abuse of discretion. The trial judge conducted all of the proceedings in this case through five years of litigation including a lengthy trial. He clearly has the better vantage point to assess the factual issues involving credibility and weight of the evidence. His order exhibits careful consideration of appellant’s claims.

GUNTHER, BOBBY W., STONE, BARRY J., and WARNER, MARTHA C., Associate Judges, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. The standard of review of an order denying attorney’s fees requested under section 772.104, Florida Statutes (1987), is whether the trial court abused its discretion. See Foreman v. E.F. Hutton & Co., Inc., 568 So.2d 531, 532 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). Upon our review of the record in this case and the court’s extensive order, we conclude that appellant has not shown any abuse of discretion. The trial judge conducted all of the proceedings in this case through five years of litigation including a lengthy trial. He clearly has the better vantage point to assess the factual issues involving credibility and weight of the evidence. His order exhibits careful consideration of appellant’s claims.

GUNTHER, BOBBY W., STONE, BARRY J., and WARNER, MARTHA C., Associate Judges, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

639 So. 2d 991, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 318, 1994 WL 19516, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/association-of-school-consultants-inc-v-spillis-candela-partners-inc-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack