Rudolf v. Gray, Harris & Robinson, P.A.

901 So. 2d 423, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 7542, 2005 WL 1186312
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 20, 2005·No. No. 5D04-368·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

ON MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION REGARDING FEES

SHARP, W., J.

We grant the motion for clarification as follows. This court has determined that appellee is entitled to appellate attorney’s fees pursuant to section 768.79, Florida Statutes and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442, conditioned upon the trial court determining that the offer of judgment was properly made and submitted and that appellee is otherwise entitled to fees pursuant to section 768.79, Florida Statutes and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442. Appellee is not entitled to appellate attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes.

Motion for Clarification GRANTED.

THOMPSON and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.

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

Rudolf v. Gray, Harris & Robinson, P.A., 901 So. 2d 423, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 7542, 2005 WL 1186312 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

901 So. 2d 423 (Rudolf v. Gray, Harris & Robinson, P.A.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Crowley's Concrete, Inc. v. Gathercole
163 So. 3d 1283 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015)