International Center of the Americas, Inc. v. Dade Fashions, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

International Center of the Americas, Inc. v. Dade Fashions, Inc.

391 So. 2d 383, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 18257

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 23, 1980

DocketNo. 80-1934

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 391 So. 2d 383 (International Center of the Americas, Inc. v. Dade Fashions, Inc.) 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

International Center of the Americas, Inc. v. Dade Fashions, Inc., 391 So. 2d 383, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 18257 (Fla. Ct. App. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In an action at equity between these parties, appellant ultimately prevailed. Among costs assessed at the close of the proceedings was a $700 fee of a court-appointed monitor of disputed funds, charged to appellant.

In response to the contention that the prevailing party may not properly be made to bear any costs of a litigation, we quote the language of Wilhelm v. Adams, 102 Fla. 669, 136 So. 397, 398 (1931):

So it appears that the rule is well settled that in equity causes it. is within the province of the chancellor to make an order prorating the costs, if there appear facts or circumstances which would render it inequitable and unjust to require the losing party to pay the entire cost. This is a matter which is within the sound judicial discretion of the chancellor and, without having before us a transcript of the record upon which he based his conclusions in this regard, we certainly cannot assume to say that he abused that discretion.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

In an action at equity between these parties, appellant ultimately prevailed. Among costs assessed at the close of the proceedings was a $700 fee of a court-appointed monitor of disputed funds, charged to appellant.

In response to the contention that the prevailing party may not properly be made to bear any costs of a litigation, we quote the language of Wilhelm v. Adams, 102 Fla. 669, 136 So. 397, 398 (1931):

So it appears that the rule is well settled that in equity causes it. is within the province of the chancellor to make an order prorating the costs, if there appear facts or circumstances which would render it inequitable and unjust to require the losing party to pay the entire cost. This is a matter which is within the sound judicial discretion of the chancellor and, without having before us a transcript of the record upon which he based his conclusions in this regard, we certainly cannot assume to say that he abused that discretion.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

391 So. 2d 383, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 18257, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/international-center-of-the-americas-inc-v-dade-fashions-inc-fladistctapp-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack