Stephens v. Owens Law Group . P.A.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Stephens v. Owens Law Group . P.A.

198 So. 3d 709, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 649, 2016 WL 231771

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 20, 2016

Docket2D14-1321

StatusPublished

This text of 198 So. 3d 709 (Stephens v. Owens Law Group . P.A.) 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

Stephens v. Owens Law Group . P.A., 198 So. 3d 709, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 649, 2016 WL 231771 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

Pincite

Opinion

*710 KHOUZAM, Judge.

We affirm the issues raised by. the Appellants without comment. However, Owens Law Group, P.A., and Allen Dell, P.A., concede that the trial court miscalculated the interest on the order directing the Guardian to pay them from the restricted depository. The Guardian requested that $20,000 be paid to these creditor Appel-lees. It is unclear from the appellate record how the trial court calculated the interest, but it appears that it used the wrong time period, used an incorrect inter- • est rate, or made a computational error in arriving at a total award of $23,693.53. Accordingly, we reverse the order’s award of interest, and remand to the trial court with directions to recalculate its interest award. See §§ 55.03, 687.01, Fla. Stat. (2013).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

KELLY and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

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

*710 KHOUZAM, Judge.

We affirm the issues raised by. the Appellants without comment. However, Owens Law Group, P.A., and Allen Dell, P.A., concede that the trial court miscalculated the interest on the order directing the Guardian to pay them from the restricted depository. The Guardian requested that $20,000 be paid to these creditor Appel-lees. It is unclear from the appellate record how the trial court calculated the interest, but it appears that it used the wrong time period, used an incorrect inter- • est rate, or made a computational error in arriving at a total award of $23,693.53. Accordingly, we reverse the order’s award of interest, and remand to the trial court with directions to recalculate its interest award. See §§ 55.03, 687.01, Fla. Stat. (2013).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

KELLY and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

198 So. 3d 709, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 649, 2016 WL 231771, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stephens-v-owens-law-group-pa-fladistctapp-2016.