Florida Leisure Acquisition Corp. v. Florida Commission on Human Relations

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Florida Leisure Acquisition Corp. v. Florida Commission on Human Relations

708 So. 2d 1001, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2954, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 823

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 27, 1998

DocketNo. 97-842

StatusPublished

This text of 708 So. 2d 1001 (Florida Leisure Acquisition Corp. v. Florida Commission on Human Relations) 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

Florida Leisure Acquisition Corp. v. Florida Commission on Human Relations, 708 So. 2d 1001, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2954, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 823 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, Florida Leisure Acquisition Corporation, seeks review of an order by the Human Relations Commission denying the motion to tax attorney’s fees against the Commission for proceedings that transpired before the Commission, which proceedings eventuated in an appeal by the original complainant, Faison, to the First District Court of Appeal. See Faison v. Florida Leisure Acquisition Corp., 686 So.2d 585 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). This matter previously had been before this court when Florida Leisure sought review of a non-final administrative order of the Commission pursuant to Rule 9.100(a) and (c), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure and section 120.68(1), Florida Statutes. (1993). We declined that review with our opinion in Florida Leisure Acquisition Corp. v. Florida Commission on Human Relations, 689 So.2d 1028 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). In a concurring opinion in the latter case, reference was made to the possibility of assessing reasonable attorney’s fees for the prevailing party against the Human Relations Commission. Unfortunately, the authority for that reference erroneously was cited as section 760.11(13), Florida Statutes (1993). The correct statutory reference for such fees, at least at this point in time, is section 120.595(5), Florida Statutes (1997), which can be utilized by an appellate court in awarding reasonable attorney’s fees to a prevailing party when the court finds that the agency action which precipitated the appeal was a gross abuse of the agency’s discretion. In the instant case any issue as to the assessment of attorney’s fees against the Commission should have been submitted to the First District Court of Appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the Commission.

AFFIRMED.

COBB, W. SHARP and ANTOON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, Florida Leisure Acquisition Corporation, seeks review of an order by the Human Relations Commission denying the motion to tax attorney’s fees against the Commission for proceedings that transpired before the Commission, which proceedings eventuated in an appeal by the original complainant, Faison, to the First District Court of Appeal. See Faison v. Florida Leisure Acquisition Corp., 686 So.2d 585 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). This matter previously had been before this court when Florida Leisure sought review of a non-final administrative order of the Commission pursuant to Rule 9.100(a) and (c), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure and section 120.68(1), Florida Statutes. (1993). We declined that review with our opinion in Florida Leisure Acquisition Corp. v. Florida Commission on Human Relations, 689 So.2d 1028 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994). In a concurring opinion in the latter case, reference was made to the possibility of assessing reasonable attorney’s fees for the prevailing party against the Human Relations Commission. Unfortunately, the authority for that reference erroneously was cited as section 760.11(13), Florida Statutes (1993). The correct statutory reference for such fees, at least at this point in time, is section 120.595(5), Florida Statutes (1997), which can be utilized by an appellate court in awarding reasonable attorney’s fees to a prevailing party when the court finds that the agency action which precipitated the appeal was a gross abuse of the agency’s discretion. In the instant case any issue as to the assessment of attorney’s fees against the Commission should have been submitted to the First District Court of Appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the order of the Commission.

AFFIRMED.

COBB, W. SHARP and ANTOON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

708 So. 2d 1001, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2954, 23 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 823, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/florida-leisure-acquisition-corp-v-florida-commission-on-human-relations-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack