Cadenhead v. Gaetz
This text of 677 So. 2d 96 (Cadenhead v. Gaetz) 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.
Opinion
Chris CADENHEAD, Appellant,
v.
Donald J. and Victoria Q. GAETZ, et al., Appellees.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
*97 Daniel C. Campbell of Cadenhead, Campbell, Knopes & Jernigan, Crestview, for Appellant.
Christa L. Hardy of Chesser, Wingard, Barr, Whitney, Flowers and Fleet, P.A., Shalimar, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
This appeal arises from an order granting attorneys' fees to Appellees. We reverse and remand because we cannot discern the legal basis for the lower court's award.
Generally, attorney's fees are not awarded unless authorized by statute or contract. Here, the lower court failed to cite to any statute or contract authorizing an award of attorneys' fees and failed to state any exception to this general rule. See, e.g., California Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Coley, 593 So.2d 1152 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). On remand, the trial court shall either provide an appropriate legal basis for the attorneys' fee award or strike it.
BOOTH, JOANOS and BENTON, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
677 So. 2d 96, 1996 WL 413870, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cadenhead-v-gaetz-fladistctapp-1996.