Simon Debartolo Group, Inc. v. Bratley

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Simon Debartolo Group, Inc. v. Bratley

838 So. 2d 1239, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 3061, 2003 WL 826011

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 10, 2003

DocketNo. 1D02-1355

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 838 So. 2d 1239 (Simon Debartolo Group, Inc. v. Bratley) 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

Simon Debartolo Group, Inc. v. Bratley, 838 So. 2d 1239, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 3061, 2003 WL 826011 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm. See Lewis v. Bondy, 752 So.2d 1225 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); see also Labaton v. Mellert, 772 So.2d 622 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). Because section 768.79(7)(b), Florida Statutes, directs trial courts to consider, in determining the reasonableness of an attorney’s fee award, certain enumerated factors “along with all other relevant criteria,” and because sections 768.79(6)(a) and (b), Florida Statutes, refer trial courts to the guidelines promulgated by the supreme court, we agree with the Second and Fourth Districts that the Legislature authorized trial courts to consider [1240]*1240and apply a contingency risk multiplier when awarding an attorney’s fee award pursuant to section 768.79. See Island Hoppers, Ltd. v. Keith, 820 So.2d 967, 974 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp. v. Jensen, 752 So.2d 1275, 1276 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). In doing so, we note conflict with Allstate Insurance Co. v. Sarkis, 809 So.2d 6 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (en banc), review granted, 826 So.2d 992 (Fla.2002).

AFFIRMED.

BOOTH, WEBSTER and LEWIS, JJ„ concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm. See Lewis v. Bondy, 752 So.2d 1225 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); see also Labaton v. Mellert, 772 So.2d 622 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). Because section 768.79(7)(b), Florida Statutes, directs trial courts to consider, in determining the reasonableness of an attorney’s fee award, certain enumerated factors “along with all other relevant criteria,” and because sections 768.79(6)(a) and (b), Florida Statutes, refer trial courts to the guidelines promulgated by the supreme court, we agree with the Second and Fourth Districts that the Legislature authorized trial courts to consider [1240]*1240and apply a contingency risk multiplier when awarding an attorney’s fee award pursuant to section 768.79. See Island Hoppers, Ltd. v. Keith, 820 So.2d 967, 974 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Pirelli Armstrong Tire Corp. v. Jensen, 752 So.2d 1275, 1276 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). In doing so, we note conflict with Allstate Insurance Co. v. Sarkis, 809 So.2d 6 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (en banc), review granted, 826 So.2d 992 (Fla.2002).

AFFIRMED.

BOOTH, WEBSTER and LEWIS, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

838 So. 2d 1239, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 3061, 2003 WL 826011, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simon-debartolo-group-inc-v-bratley-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack