O'Grady v. Potash

District Court of Appeal of Florida

O'Grady v. Potash

861 So. 2d 1281, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 19548, 2003 WL 23008822

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 24, 2003

DocketNo. 3D03-113

StatusPublished

This text of 861 So. 2d 1281 (O'Grady v. Potash) 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

O'Grady v. Potash, 861 So. 2d 1281, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 19548, 2003 WL 23008822 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On remand from O’Grady v. Potash, 824 So.2d 904 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), rev. denied, 842 So.2d 845 (Fla.2003), the trial court found third party defendant, Monette Klein O’Grady, entitled to an award of attorney’s fees and costs in her favor under Section 57.105(1), Florida Statutes (1999). Without an evidentiary hearing to determine its applicability, however, the trial court went on to exclude counsel for third party plaintiff, Irwin Potash, from liability for such fees and costs under the “good faith” exception. § 57.105(1), Fla. Stat. (1999)(“However, the losing party’s attorney is not personally responsible if he or she acted in good faith, based on the representations of his or her client_”). We reverse that portion of the order excluding counsel for Potash from liability, and remand for an evidentiary hearing where counsel for Potash may present evidence, if any, that he acted in good faith based on the representations of his client.

Reversed and remanded.

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

PER CURIAM.

On remand from O’Grady v. Potash, 824 So.2d 904 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002), rev. denied, 842 So.2d 845 (Fla.2003), the trial court found third party defendant, Monette Klein O’Grady, entitled to an award of attorney’s fees and costs in her favor under Section 57.105(1), Florida Statutes (1999). Without an evidentiary hearing to determine its applicability, however, the trial court went on to exclude counsel for third party plaintiff, Irwin Potash, from liability for such fees and costs under the “good faith” exception. § 57.105(1), Fla. Stat. (1999)(“However, the losing party’s attorney is not personally responsible if he or she acted in good faith, based on the representations of his or her client_”). We reverse that portion of the order excluding counsel for Potash from liability, and remand for an evidentiary hearing where counsel for Potash may present evidence, if any, that he acted in good faith based on the representations of his client.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

861 So. 2d 1281, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 19548, 2003 WL 23008822, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ogrady-v-potash-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack