Douglas v. Wilson

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Douglas v. Wilson

472 So. 2d 876, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1765, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14499

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 18, 1985

DocketNo. BA-160

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 472 So. 2d 876 (Douglas v. Wilson) 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

Douglas v. Wilson, 472 So. 2d 876, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1765, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14499 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellants appeal the trial court’s judgment awarding appellees costs after appellants had voluntarily dismissed Count I of a two-count complaint without prejudice, pursuant to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.420(a)(l)(i). The trial court’s order was rendered in response to appellees’ motion to tax costs filed pursuant to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.420(d). We find no error in the amount of costs awarded and affirm that portion of the judgment appealed from. However, we agree with appellant Clarence B. Douglas that the trial court improperly rendered a joint judgment for costs as to Count I of the appellants’ complaint, the count voluntarily dismissed before trial. Count I stated a cause of action by and in behalf of Nell Douglas only. See, Martel v. Carlson, 118 So.2d 592 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960), cert. den., 123 So.2d 674 (Fla.1960). Accordingly, we vacate that portion of the judgment holding appellant Clarence B. Douglas liable for costs incurred in preparation for trial on Count I of the amended complaint. The remainder of the judgment is affirmed.

AFFIRMED as modified.

MILLS, SMITH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellants appeal the trial court’s judgment awarding appellees costs after appellants had voluntarily dismissed Count I of a two-count complaint without prejudice, pursuant to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.420(a)(l)(i). The trial court’s order was rendered in response to appellees’ motion to tax costs filed pursuant to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.420(d). We find no error in the amount of costs awarded and affirm that portion of the judgment appealed from. However, we agree with appellant Clarence B. Douglas that the trial court improperly rendered a joint judgment for costs as to Count I of the appellants’ complaint, the count voluntarily dismissed before trial. Count I stated a cause of action by and in behalf of Nell Douglas only. See, Martel v. Carlson, 118 So.2d 592 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960), cert. den., 123 So.2d 674 (Fla.1960). Accordingly, we vacate that portion of the judgment holding appellant Clarence B. Douglas liable for costs incurred in preparation for trial on Count I of the amended complaint. The remainder of the judgment is affirmed.

AFFIRMED as modified.

MILLS, SMITH and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

472 So. 2d 876, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 1765, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 14499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/douglas-v-wilson-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack