Kemp v. Kemp

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kemp v. Kemp

61 So. 3d 481, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 7248, 2011 WL 1899516

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 20, 2011

Docket5D09-3007

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 61 So. 3d 481 (Kemp v. Kemp) 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

Kemp v. Kemp, 61 So. 3d 481, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 7248, 2011 WL 1899516 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

ORFINGER, J.

In this post-dissolution proceeding, we affirm the trial court’s judgment of contempt in all respects, save one. Under prevailing law, the trial court must make findings to substantiate an award of attorney’s fees to allow for meaningful appellate review. See DeLillo v. DeLillo, 848 So.2d 454, 455 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). When someone other than an attorney’s own client is required to pay their fees, the trial court must award a reasonable fee, determined from testimony (absent any stipulations) as to the prevailing rates for attorneys in comparable circumstances and the amount of time reasonably expended by the attorney on the matter. See Franklin & Marbin, P.A. v. Mascola, 711 So.2d 46, 48-49 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); see also Fla. Patient’s Comp. Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145 (Fla.1985). This determination requires the trial court to make findings of fact regarding the number of hours spent, and a reasonable hourly rate. Simpson v. Simpson, 780 So.2d 985, 988 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). Absent such factual findings, the award of attorneys’ fees must be reversed *482 and remanded for further proceedings. In all other respects, the judgment of contempt is affirmed.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

GRIFFIN and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

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

ORFINGER, J.

In this post-dissolution proceeding, we affirm the trial court’s judgment of contempt in all respects, save one. Under prevailing law, the trial court must make findings to substantiate an award of attorney’s fees to allow for meaningful appellate review. See DeLillo v. DeLillo, 848 So.2d 454, 455 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). When someone other than an attorney’s own client is required to pay their fees, the trial court must award a reasonable fee, determined from testimony (absent any stipulations) as to the prevailing rates for attorneys in comparable circumstances and the amount of time reasonably expended by the attorney on the matter. See Franklin & Marbin, P.A. v. Mascola, 711 So.2d 46, 48-49 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998); see also Fla. Patient’s Comp. Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145 (Fla.1985). This determination requires the trial court to make findings of fact regarding the number of hours spent, and a reasonable hourly rate. Simpson v. Simpson, 780 So.2d 985, 988 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001). Absent such factual findings, the award of attorneys’ fees must be reversed *482 and remanded for further proceedings. In all other respects, the judgment of contempt is affirmed.

AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; and REMANDED.

GRIFFIN and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

61 So. 3d 481, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 7248, 2011 WL 1899516, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kemp-v-kemp-fladistctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack