Sole v. Kneale
This text of 629 So. 2d 999 (Sole v. Kneale) 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.
Opinion
Appellants Sole and Pintado appeal a final order directing them to pay special master’s fees. We reverse.
There is no substantive basis for holding the attorney of record personally liable for costs in the absence of authorization by a contract or statute, Israel v. Lee, 470 So.2d 861 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), or other than as a sanction for wrongdoing. Harrison v. State, 519 So.2d 72 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). See 7A [1000]*1000C.J.S. Attorney & Client, § 138 (1980) (In the absence of misconduct or of a statute or rule of court providing otherwise, an attorney is not liable for the costs of suit unless he has agreed to become liable). Because none of these circumstances were present, we reverse.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
629 So. 2d 999, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 13096, 1993 WL 536019, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sole-v-kneale-fladistctapp-1993.