De Loach v. Westman

506 So. 2d 1142, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1205
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 8, 1987
Docket86-2157
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 506 So. 2d 1142 (De Loach v. Westman) 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
De Loach v. Westman, 506 So. 2d 1142, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1205 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Opinion

506 So.2d 1142 (1987)

Guion T. DE LOACH, Appellant,
v.
Carl E. WESTMAN, Interim Personal Representative of the Estate of Margaret H. Benson, Deceased, Appellee.

No. 86-2157.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 8, 1987.

Guion T. De Loach, Naples, pro se.

John W. MacKay, Tampa, for appellant.

Edward K. Chefy and Richard M. Marchewka of Frost & Jacobs, Naples, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

In this probate matter an attorney appeals from the order awarding the attorney $2,750 as fees for his work in obtaining the revocation of a will, the removal of the personal representative appointed pursuant to that will, the admission to probate of another will which the attorney had prepared for the decedent, and the appointment of a substitute, interim personal representative.

Although we do not conclude that the record establishes that there was reversible error in the amount of the fees awarded, the trial court failed to include in the order specific findings as to hourly rate, the number of hours reasonably expended, and the appropriateness of reduction or enhancement factors as required by Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145 (Fla. 1985). See Manuel v. Manuel, 498 So.2d 1369 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Brady v. Williams, 491 So.2d 1160 (Fla. 2d *1143 DCA 1986); Boyle v. Boyle, 485 So.2d 879 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).

It does, however, appear from the record that the trial court did consider the factors which are required to be considered in the fixing of reasonable attorney's fees. We therefore remand only for the entry of an order containing the findings required by Rowe.

LEHAN, A.C.J., and SANDERLIN and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.

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

Related

In re Estate of Warwick
586 So. 2d 327 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1991)
In Re Estate of Platt
586 So. 2d 328 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1991)
Moyle v. Moschell
582 So. 2d 111 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Walker v. Tindall
567 So. 2d 50 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Sun-Island Realty, Inc. v. M.D. Moody & Sons, Inc.
564 So. 2d 559 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Abdalla v. Southwind, Inc.
561 So. 2d 468 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Whidden v. Allstate Insurance
39 Fla. Supp. 2d 85 (Florida Circuit Courts, 1989)
Woodruff & Sons, Inc. v. Pary, Inc.
543 So. 2d 467 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Keith v. Keith
537 So. 2d 138 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Clarkson v. U.S. Home Corp.
529 So. 2d 711 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
506 So. 2d 1142, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1205, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-loach-v-westman-fladistctapp-1987.