Marathon Lodge No 1058 Loyal Order of Moose, Inc. v. Bohuslava Persl

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: May 29, 2024
• Docket: 2023-0841
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed May 29, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

Nos. 3D23-0841 & 3D22-1695 Lower Tribunal No. 19-113-M ________________

Marathon Lodge No 1058 Loyal Order of Moose, Inc., Appellant,

vs.

Bohuslava Persl, Appellee.

Appeals from the Circuit Court for Monroe County, Mark H. Jones, Judge.

Shochet Law Group, and Randall Shochet and Doreen Inkeles (Trenton), for appellant.

Roth & Scholl, and Jeffrey C. Roth and Christine M. Rodriguez; Mintz Truppman, P.A., and Keith A. Truppman, for appellee.

Before SCALES, GORDO, and LOBREE, JJ.

PER CURIAM. In these consolidated appeals, Marathon Lodge No 1058 Loyal Order

of Moose, Inc., appellant and plaintiff below, challenges the final judgment of

the trial court, claiming that the trial court erred by denying its motion for

leave to file an amended complaint that it sought to file a little over a week

before trial (3D22-1695); and challenges a final judgment awarding

Bohuslava Persl, appellee and defendant below, attorneys’ fees pursuant to

a proposal for settlement (3D23-0841). We affirm both orders.

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellant’s motion

seeking leave to file an amended complaint. Toscano Condo. Ass’n v. DDA

Eng’rs, P.A., 274 So. 3d 487, 490 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (“This Court reviews

the denial of a motion for leave to amend a pleading for abuse of discretion.”).

In Toscano, as here, this Court affirmed the denial of a motion for leave to

amend the complaint that the plaintiff had made close to the scheduled date

of trial, and recognized the general rule that a liberal granting of amendment

decreases as a case progresses to trial. Id.

Without a transcript of the March 27, 2023 evidentiary hearing that the

trial court conducted on Persl’s fee motion, we are unable to discern any

reversible error in the amounts awarded by the trial court in its final judgment

on attorneys’ fees and costs. Thomas v. Perkins, 723 So. 2d 293, 294 (Fla.

3d DCA 1998).

2 Affirmed.