Sole v. Kneale

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sole v. Kneale

629 So. 2d 999, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 13096, 1993 WL 536019

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 28, 1993·No. Nos. 93-734, 93-1104·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

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

PER CURIAM.

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.

Sole v. Kneale, 629 So. 2d 999, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 13096, 1993 WL 536019 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

629 So. 2d 999 (Sole v. Kneale) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related