The Wellness Center of London Square, Inc. v. DHL Express (USA), Inc.
This text of The Wellness Center of London Square, Inc. v. DHL Express (USA), Inc. (The Wellness Center of London Square, Inc. v. DHL Express (USA), Inc.) 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
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed August 7, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D24-0065 Lower Tribunal No. 21-10568 CC ________________
The Wellness Center of London Square, Inc., Appellant,
vs.
DHL Express (USA), Inc., Appellee.
An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Linda Singer Stein, Judge.
Ramsaran Law Group, and Jerome Ramsaran, for appellant.
Fowler White Burnett, P.A., and Ana E. Tovar, for appellee.
Before SCALES, MILLER, and GORDO, JJ.
PER CURIAM. Appellant, The Wellness Center of London Square, Inc. (“Wellness
Center”), appeals a December 13, 2023 final judgment of the county court
awarding attorney’s fees and costs to appellee, DHL Express (USA), Inc.
(“DHL”), pursuant to section 57.105(1) of the Florida Statutes (2022). We
affirm in part and reverse in part.
In its appeal, Wellness Center does not challenge the trial court’s
finding of DHL’s entitlement to attorney’s fees but disputes only the
$23,803.00 fee amount awarded by the court. Because Wellness Center has
not provided us a transcript of the evidentiary hearing where the lower court
addressed attorney’s fees, and the face of the record reveals no error in the
court’s calculation of the fee amount awarded to DHL, we must affirm the fee
award. See Myret, LLC v. Grp. LX, Inc., 245 So. 3d 1024, 1024 (Fla. 3d DCA
2018) (“Myret disputes the amount of the fees awarded. However, where, as
here, no transcript of the hearing where the amount of the fees was
addressed has been provided, and the judgment is not fundamentally
erroneous on its face, we must affirm.”).
Wellness Center also challenges the trial court’s $578.55 costs award.
Because “nothing in the text of section 57.105(1) provides for the award of
costs,” Law Offices of Borell, P.A. v. Acevedo, 322 So. 3d 1218, 1219 (Fla.
2 3d DCA 2021), we reverse that portion of the December 13, 2023 final
judgment awarding costs to DHL. Id.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions to
strike the award of costs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
The Wellness Center of London Square, Inc. v. DHL Express (USA), Inc., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/the-wellness-center-of-london-square-inc-v-dhl-express-usa-inc-fladistctapp-2024.