Rivenbark v. Johns

211 So. 2d 233, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5446
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Rivenbark v. Johns. Read the opinion of the Court — 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 6133
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 18, 1968·No. Nos. I-185, I-225·Published

Opinion

ON PETITION FOR REVIEW OF COST JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

Appellant Rivenbark in accordance with Rule 3.16, Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A., petitions this court for review of cost judgments entered by the Circuit Court after remand of these two consolidated cases.

It is Rivenbark’s position that Section 57.071, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., as amended in 1967, mandatorily requires the assessment of bond premiums and expenses of the court reporter as costs. Prior to the 1967 amendment, the statute appeared as Section 58.08, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., and it provided that the allowance of bond premiums as costs was a matter within the discretion of the trial judge. Notice of appeal in one of these causes was filed on September 3, 1966, and in the other cause on September 22, 1966, and at that time the appellate costs were incurred. It is our opinion, and we so hold, that the 1967 legislative enactment does not apply to the settlement of the costs in these causes.

The petition is denied.

WIGGINTON, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and RAWLS, JJ., concur.

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

Rivenbark v. Johns, 211 So. 2d 233, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5446 (Fla. Ct. App. 1968).

211 So. 2d 233 (Rivenbark v. Johns) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.