Oliveri v. Bateman Group, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Oliveri v. Bateman Group, Inc.

874 So. 2d 1290, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 8592, 2004 WL 1359649

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 18, 2004

DocketNo. 2D03-4786

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 874 So. 2d 1290 (Oliveri v. Bateman Group, 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

Oliveri v. Bateman Group, Inc., 874 So. 2d 1290, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 8592, 2004 WL 1359649 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

STRINGER, Judge.

Charles Oliveri seeks review of the order that awarded The Bateman Group, Inc. (“Bateman”) attorney’s fees and costs of $1431 .25 after the court dismissed Oli-veri’s complaint for failure to prosecute. We have jurisdiction to review the order as a final order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(b)(1)(A) even though the order awards attorney’s fees and costs without expressly providing for its execution. See City of Haines City v. Allen, 549 So.2d 678 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (“The language ‘for which let execution issue’ is not essential to the finality of a judgment.”); Chan v. Brunswick Corp., 388 So.2d 274, 275 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). But see DuBreuil v. Regnvall, 527 So.2d 249, 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (holding that the omission of execution language grants a judgment debtor a stay of execution and precludes the judgment creditor from executing on the judgment); Murphy v. Murphy, 378 So.2d 27, 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).

We conclude that the trial court erred in awarding attorney’s fees and costs because Bateman had not filed a timely motion for attorney’s fees and costs as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.525. See Mook v. Mook, 873 So.2d 363 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Gulf Landings Ass’n, Inc. v. Hershberger, 845 So.2d 344, 345-46 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Diaz v. Bowen, 832 So.2d 200, 200-01 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002).

Reversed.

FULMER and SILBERMAN, JJ„ Concur.

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

STRINGER, Judge.

Charles Oliveri seeks review of the order that awarded The Bateman Group, Inc. (“Bateman”) attorney’s fees and costs of $1431 .25 after the court dismissed Oli-veri’s complaint for failure to prosecute. We have jurisdiction to review the order as a final order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(b)(1)(A) even though the order awards attorney’s fees and costs without expressly providing for its execution. See City of Haines City v. Allen, 549 So.2d 678 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) (“The language ‘for which let execution issue’ is not essential to the finality of a judgment.”); Chan v. Brunswick Corp., 388 So.2d 274, 275 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). But see DuBreuil v. Regnvall, 527 So.2d 249, 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (holding that the omission of execution language grants a judgment debtor a stay of execution and precludes the judgment creditor from executing on the judgment); Murphy v. Murphy, 378 So.2d 27, 28 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).

We conclude that the trial court erred in awarding attorney’s fees and costs because Bateman had not filed a timely motion for attorney’s fees and costs as required by Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.525. See Mook v. Mook, 873 So.2d 363 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Gulf Landings Ass’n, Inc. v. Hershberger, 845 So.2d 344, 345-46 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Diaz v. Bowen, 832 So.2d 200, 200-01 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002).

Reversed.

FULMER and SILBERMAN, JJ„ Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

874 So. 2d 1290, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 8592, 2004 WL 1359649, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oliveri-v-bateman-group-inc-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack