Dynabilt Technology International Corp. v. Warren Henry Automobiles, Inc.

755 So. 2d 765, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 3965, 2000 WL 346140
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 5, 2000·No. No. 3D99-1786·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s assessment of attorney’s fees against Dynabilt Technology International Corporation, but reverse as to the amount of fees awarded because the final judgment does not make an express finding as to the number of hours reasonably expended on the litigation and the reasonable hourly rate. We remand for the sole purpose of making these findings. Rodriguez v. Campbell, 720 So.2d 266 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), review denied, 731 So.2d 650 (Fla.1999); State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Gil, 573 So.2d 90 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).

.The remaining points that the appellant has raised on appeal lack merit.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

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

Dynabilt Technology International Corp. v. Warren Henry Automobiles, Inc., 755 So. 2d 765, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 3965, 2000 WL 346140 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

755 So. 2d 765 (Dynabilt Technology International Corp. v. Warren Henry Automobiles, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Gil
573 So. 2d 90 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Rodriguez v. Campbell
720 So. 2d 266 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)