Melissa Woodman v. Brickell Mar, LLC

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: December 31, 2025
• Docket: 3D2025-0470
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed December 31, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D25-0470 Lower Tribunal No. 22-14075-SP-25 ________________

Melissa Woodman, et al., Appellants,

vs.

Brickell Mar, LLC, Appellee.

An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Jacqueline Woodward, Judge.

Kula & Associates, P.A., and Elliot B. Kula and William D. Mueller, for appellants.

Welbaum Guernsey, and Robert J. Black, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ.

GORDO, J. Melissa Woodman and Timothy Enriquez (“Appellants”) appeal the trial

court’s denial of their motion for attorney’s fees and costs following Brickell

Mar, LLC’s, (“Brickell Mar”) voluntary dismissal of its claim in the Small

Claims Division against the Appellants. We have jurisdiction. Fla. R. App.

P. 9.030(b)(1)(A). We reverse and remand.

The trial court in this case applied Stockman v. Downs, 573 So. 2d 835,

837–838 (Fla. 1991), and determined the Appellants failed to properly place

Brickell Mar on notice of the intent to claim attorney’s fees. This case is

instead controlled by Green v. Sun Harbor Homeowners’ Ass’n, 730 So. 2d

1261 (Fla. 1998) and French Vill. Condo. Ass’n., Inc. v. Flynn, 403 So. 3d

854 (Fla. 4th DCA 2025).

“This case presents a situation different from that in Stockman.”

Green, 730 So. 2d at 1262. “In Stockman, there had been a responsive

pleading (an answer) and also a trial before the defendant moved for attorney

fees.” Id. “In this case, there had been only a complaint and a motion to

dismiss before the defendant moved for attorney fees.” Id. “This case had

not proceeded to the point at which the defendant was required to answer.”

Id. “A motion to dismiss is not a pleading.” Id. at 1263. “[T]he failure to set

forth a claim for attorney fees in a motion does not constitute a waiver.” Id.

“[W]e require that a defendant’s claim for attorney fees is to be made either

2 in the defendant’s motion to dismiss or by a separate motion which must be

filed within thirty days following a dismissal of the action.” Green, 730 So. 2d

at 1263; French Vill. Condo. Ass’n., Inc., 403 So. 3d at 856. Because the

Appellants were not required to file a responsive pleading and they properly

advanced their claim for attorney’s fees within thirty days of the final

judgment, we reverse the trial court’s decision and remand for further

proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.