Wiper Hut Systems, Inc. v. Steavens

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Wiper Hut Systems, Inc. v. Steavens

626 So. 2d 289, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 11105, 1993 WL 444943

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 3, 1993

DocketNo. 93-2627

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 626 So. 2d 289 (Wiper Hut Systems, Inc. v. Steavens) 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

Wiper Hut Systems, Inc. v. Steavens, 626 So. 2d 289, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 11105, 1993 WL 444943 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioners, defendants below, seek certio-rari review of a trial court’s order denying a portion of their motion to tax costs and their motion to assess attorney’s fees against re-spondeni/plaintiff, after plaintiffs voluntary dismissal of this lawsuit. Certiorari is the proper method to review this order. Rose Printing Co., Inc. v. Wilson, 602 So.2d 600 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), aff'd, 624 So.2d 257 (Fla.1993). We quash the order and remand with directions that the trial court award the costs relating to the deposition of the plaintiff and award attorney’s fees, which are recoverable under these circumstances by virtue of the contract between the parties. Id.

FARMER, KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Petitioners, defendants below, seek certio-rari review of a trial court’s order denying a portion of their motion to tax costs and their motion to assess attorney’s fees against re-spondeni/plaintiff, after plaintiffs voluntary dismissal of this lawsuit. Certiorari is the proper method to review this order. Rose Printing Co., Inc. v. Wilson, 602 So.2d 600 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), aff'd, 624 So.2d 257 (Fla.1993). We quash the order and remand with directions that the trial court award the costs relating to the deposition of the plaintiff and award attorney’s fees, which are recoverable under these circumstances by virtue of the contract between the parties. Id.

FARMER, KLEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

626 So. 2d 289, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 11105, 1993 WL 444943, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wiper-hut-systems-inc-v-steavens-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack