Walgreen Co. v. Catlin

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Walgreen Co. v. Catlin

650 So. 2d 94, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 438, 1995 WL 25767

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 25, 1995

DocketNo. 94-2353

StatusPublished

This text of 650 So. 2d 94 (Walgreen Co. v. Catlin) 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

Walgreen Co. v. Catlin, 650 So. 2d 94, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 438, 1995 WL 25767 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In the county court, a landlord instituted an eviction proceeding based upon a claim of breach of a covenant to maintain the premises. At the conclusion of the bench trial, the trial court entered an involuntary dismissal in favor of the tenant. The landlord appealed. The appellate court disposed of the appeal by reversing for a new trial. It then granted unconditionally a motion for attorney’s fees which the landlord had filed, citing section 83.231, Florida Statutes (1993). It may have been the intention of the appellate court to have granted the motion and remand to the county court for determination in the event the landlord ultimately prevailed on the merits. However, we have no way of knowing what the appellate court meant nor will we reconstruct the events and make such a determination nor will we substitute our judgment for that of the appellate court. Accordingly, we accept jurisdiction, allow the writ, and quash the attorney’s fees order for the reasons stated herein and on authority of Dooley v. Culver, 392 So.2d 575 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).

It is so ordered.

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

PER CURIAM.

In the county court, a landlord instituted an eviction proceeding based upon a claim of breach of a covenant to maintain the premises. At the conclusion of the bench trial, the trial court entered an involuntary dismissal in favor of the tenant. The landlord appealed. The appellate court disposed of the appeal by reversing for a new trial. It then granted unconditionally a motion for attorney’s fees which the landlord had filed, citing section 83.231, Florida Statutes (1993). It may have been the intention of the appellate court to have granted the motion and remand to the county court for determination in the event the landlord ultimately prevailed on the merits. However, we have no way of knowing what the appellate court meant nor will we reconstruct the events and make such a determination nor will we substitute our judgment for that of the appellate court. Accordingly, we accept jurisdiction, allow the writ, and quash the attorney’s fees order for the reasons stated herein and on authority of Dooley v. Culver, 392 So.2d 575 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980).

It is so ordered.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

650 So. 2d 94, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 438, 1995 WL 25767, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/walgreen-co-v-catlin-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack