Additional Documents

Additional documents:

The following documents are uploaded on 4shared.com and are free to view.  If at any time the documents appear blurry, simply refresh the page.

 

1.    This document is the 17-year history of the water table measurements in Dr. Octavio Blanco’s wetland, which is located directly adjacent to the wetland in question, owned by Newland Homes Communities and NNP-Bexley.  This document proves the water table levels being located below surface level at least 82 times over the course of this time period, thereby allegedly proving that the crime of scientific misconduct of falsification of data put into a computer model occurred in order for the land developer to fraudulently be granted an illegal Environmental Resource Permit:

 

http://www.4shared.com/office/hbcJtTK3ce/Water_Measurements0001b.html

 

2.    This document is the subpoena from Ms. Margaret Lytle-Craig and Mr. David Smolker, two attorneys hired by Newland Home Communities and NNP-Bexley (the land developers), demanding that Dr. Octavio Blanco appear with many sensitive financial documents so as to garnish his property and possessions.  The highly disturbing aspect of this subpoena is that it was Ms. Margaret Lytle-Craig, herself, who listened to Mr. Steve Godley’s confession under oath that he had not performed all of the crucial and necessary scientific work required by the Federal government to fulfill both the Federal Clean Water Act and the Federal Endangered Species Act.  Ms. Margaret Lytle-Craig was completely aware of Mr. Steve Godley’s confession, which should have revoked the validity of the environmental permit, yet Ms. Lytle-Craig knowingly and willfully dispatches a subpoena to Dr. Blanco in order to seize his assets.

Page 35 of the Fee Hearing is also included with a copy of this subpoena.  Lines 23-25 are Mr. Steve Godley’s confession of never having performed the scientific work before the permit was challenged.

 

http://www.4shared.com/office/c2KMkS24ba/subpoena_craig_smolker0001.html

 

3.    This is a second attempt for Newland Homes Communities and NNP-Bexley to seize Dr. Octavio Blanco’s assets, even though a Senior Vice President for both land development corporations, Mr. Rick Harcrow, was present in court that day and listened to a witness, Mr. Steve Godley, confess that he had NOT performed all of the necessary and required work to obtain the land development permit.

Also, again, Page 35 of the Fee Hearing, Lines 23-25 are included to prove Mr. Steve Godley’s confession that he had never performed the required work, so no Environmental Resource Permit should have ever been granted, and no financial sanctions should have been instituted against Dr. Octavio Blanco by the court.

http://www.4shared.com/office/iXfMWHwsce/Second_Subpoena0001.html

4.    This is an important document from the Army Corps of Engineers, who apparently does not see a problem with the land development project.  However, perhaps once the Army Corps of Engineers realizes that one of the scientific engineers, hired by a greedy land developer to fulfill these laws ( Mr. Steve Godley,  Fee Hearing Page 35, Lines 23-25)  confessed under oath that he never even performed his responsibilities according to two Federal laws–the Federal Clean Water Act and the Federal Endangered Species Act–for his job in order to receive an Environmental Resource Permit, then perhaps the Army Corps of Engineers will change their minds!  Maybe then, the Army Corps of Engineers will have their heads be up and taking notice of these violations!

http://www.4shared.com/office/7N_nIQ6Ece/Army_Corps_of_Engineers0001.html

 

5.    The following are different court cases that have ended in consequences such as ours—financial sanctions being brought against people in order to silence them.  There is clearly a conspiracy occurring in the state of Florida to silence its citizens.  The law in Florida being abused in order to create these scenarios is Florida state statute 57.105, which is being used in an indiscriminate fashion in order to punish law-abiding citizens from exercising their United States Constitutional First Amendment Rights in order to petition the Courts to listen to their grievances, without fear of retribution.

Here is the statute, according to Florida law:

http://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2012/57.105

The following are names of court cases and important phrases so that if someone wishes to research these court cases, they can find them.  The law being abused against innocent citizens is Florida state stutue 57.105.  We will be handing over this information to the F.B.I.

895 So.2d 1088

William F. MURPHY, et al., Appellants,
v.
WISU PROPERTIES, LTD., et al., Appellees.

No. 3D03-2047.

No. 3D03-1002.

No. 3D03-1831.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

November 3, 2004.

Page 1089

 

Law Offices of Murphy & O’Brien, and William F. Murphy, Miami, and Joseph R. Littman, Hollywood, and Douglas Hiller; Stephen E. Tunstall, Miami; Lance Paskewich, for appellants.

Page 1090

James F. Comander; Law Offices of Williams & Associates, P.A. and Thomasina H. Williams, Miami, for appellees.

Before GREEN, RAMIREZ, and SHEPHERD, JJ.

GREEN, J.

 

831 So.2d 241

Eric COWGILL and Dana Cowgill Yeager, Appellants,
v.
BANK OF AMERICA, as Personal Representative, and Mickey Cowgill, individually, Appellees.

No. 2D02-1258.

No. 2D01-5425.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

November 15, 2002.

 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pasco County; Wayne L. Cobb, Judge; Maynard F. Swanson, Jr., Judge.

Bonita Kneeland Brown of Fowler, White, Boggs, Banker, P.A., Tampa, for Appellants.

Phillip A. Baumann and J. Richard Caskey of Akerman, Senterfitt & Eidson, P.A., Tampa, for Appellee, Mickey Cowgill.

Page 242

No Appearance for Appellee, Bank of America.

WHATLEY, Judge.

We affirm the summary judgment entered in favor of Mickey Cowgill on the ground that the action filed by Eric Cowgill and Dana Cowgill Yeager, the Appellants, was barred by the statute of limitations.
8 So.3d 1246

Ainslee R. FERDIE, Law Offices of Ainslee R. Ferdie, and Ferdie and Lones, Chartered, Appellants,
v.
Lawrence ISAACSON; Lori Isaacson; Promises 10, 11 & 12, Inc., a Florida corporation d/b/a Your Salon; and Peggy Gregorovic, Appellee.

No. 08-1122.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 6, 2009.

[8 So.3d 1247]

 

Stuart A. Lones of Ferdie & Lones, Chartered, Coral Gables, for appellants.

Joseph A. Sacher of Sacher, Zelman, Hartman, Paul, Beiley & Rolnick, P.A., Miami, for appellees Lawrence and Lori Isaacson and Promises 10, 11 & 12, Inc.

CIKLIN, J.

A law firm appeals a final summary judgment entered against its former client and two orders requiring the former client and the law firm itself to each pay 50% of the opposing party’s attorneys’ fees under section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2006).1 Because the trial court did not conduct an evidentiary hearing or otherwise make an express finding that the law firm was not acting in good faith, we must reverse the trial court’s order. We also reverse the

[8 So.3d 1248]
Page 1

MARY M. MONTGOMERY and BILL T. SMITH, JR., ESQ., as Personal Representatives of the ESTATE OF ROBERT M. MONTGOMERY, JR., individually and as partner of Montgomery & Larmoyeux, n/k/a Montgomery & Larson, LLP, MONTGOMERY & LARSON LLP, a Florida limited liability partnership, and BEASLEY, HAUSER, KRAMER, LEONARD & GALARDI, P.A., f/k/a BEASLEY & HAUSER, P.A., Appellants,
v.
CHRISTOPHER M. LARMOYEUX, JR., individually and as partner of Montgomery & Larmoyeux, n/k/a Montgomery & Larson, LLP, a Florida limited liability partnership, ERIC HEWKO, individually, AUSTIN CARR, individually, CHARLES L. ROBINSON, individually, and RICKEY RAY WYATT, individually, Appellees.

No. 4D08-314

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 3, 2009

 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County, Kenneth D. Stern, Judge, L.T. Case No. 502003CA004455XXXXMBAE.

Sylvia H. Walbolt of Carlton Fields, P.A., Tampa and Dean A. Morande of Carlton Fields, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellants Mary M. Montgomery and Bill T. Smith, Jr., as Personal Representatives of the Estate of Robert M. Montgomery, Jr., and Montgomery & Larson, LLP, a Florida limited liability partnership.
Page 1

WENDY’S OF N.E. FLORIDA, INC., d/b/a WENDY’S OLD FASHION HAMBURGERS, Appellant,
v.
CARL WAYNE VANDERGRIFF and CHARONO VANDERGRIFF, Appellees.

Case No. 1D02-2284.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Opinion filed November 19, 2003.

 

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County, Charles O. Mitchell, Jr., Judge.

Tracy Raffles Gunn and Cecil L. Davis, Jr., of Fowler White Boggs Banker, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant.

Charles M-P George, Coral Gables, for Appellees.

BROWNING, J.

Wendy’s of N.E. Florida (“Wendy’s”) raises three issues in its appeal of a final order granting attorney’s fees and costs to Essex Insurance Company (“Essex”). Wendy’s contends that the trial court reversibly erred because: 1) Essex’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs was untimely; 2) the trial court erroneously applied Colony Insurance Company v. G & E Tires and Service, Inc., 777 So. 2d 1034 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), to this case; and 3) disputed issues of material fact precluded attorney’s fees under section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2001). We affirm without comment the trial court’s ruling that Essex’s motion was timely, but we reverse on the remaining grounds and remand for entry of judgment for Appellant on Appellees’ claim for attorney’s fees and costs.
04-4481F DOAH Case#

Anchor Towing vs. Sunshine Towing

 

 

913 So.2d 5

E. George ALBRITTON, et. al., Appellants,
v.
Martha Jean FERRERA, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Janie Elizabeth Albritton, deceased, Appellee.

No. 1D04-3104.

No. 1D04-4434.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

September 2, 2005.

Rehearing Denied October 5, 2005.

Page 6

 

Robert F. Langford, Jr., Esq., Tallahassee, Marsha L. Lyons, Esq., of Lyons & Farrar, Tallahassee, and Harold E. Regan, Esq., Tallahassee, for Appellants.

Belinda T. France, Esq., and A. Dean Johnson, Esq., of the France Law Firm, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

HAWKES, J.

This is a consolidated appeal and the third trip to this court for these parties. George Albritton and two of his counsel, Robert Langford and Harold Regan (Appellants), challenge the trial court’s final order denying their motions for attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1999). Appellants prevailed in a previous appeal defending against Appellee, Martha Ferrera’s, claim for attorney’s

 

 

 

898 So.2d 1120

Robin HASKINS, Appellant,
v.
CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE, Appellee.

No. 4D04-507.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 30, 2005.

Page 1121

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Page 1122

 

Bruce H. Little of Bruce H. Little, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Dieter K. Gunther and Alain E. Boileau of Adorno & Yoss, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

SILVERMAN, SCOTT J., Associate Judge.

The plaintiff, Robin Haskins, brought suit against the defendant, City of Ft. Lauderdale, alleging an invasion of privacy and negligent investigation. The trial court granted Defendant’s Motion for Final Summary Judgment and Plaintiff appeals. We have jurisdiction.
In July of 1996, Plaintiff worked as a civilian employee in the communications center at the City of Fort Lauderdale Police Department (FLPD). During the course of her employment, the FLPD Office of
05-3990F DOAH Case # Babu Jain vs. Florida Agricultural and Mechanical University
912 So.2d 561

BOCA BURGER, INC., etc., Petitioner,
v.
Richard FORUM, Respondent.

No. SC01-1830.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 7, 2005.

As Revised on Denial of Rehearing September 29, 2005.

Page 562

COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED

Page 563

 

John R. Hargrove and W. Kent Brown of Heinrich, Gordon, Hargrove, Weihe and James, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, FL, Edna L. Caruso of Caruso, Burlington, Bohn and Campiani, P.A., West Palm Beach, FL, and John A. Beranek of Ausley and McMullen, Tallahassee, FL, for Petitioner.

James Fox Miller, Charles Fox Miller and Greg A. Lewen of Miller, Schwartz and Miller, P.A., Hollywood, FL, for Respondent.
Paul D. Jess, Tallahassee, FL, William C. Gentry, Jacksonville, FL, and Robert S. Peck, Washington, DC, on behalf of the Academy of Florida Trial Lawyers, Inc.; Florida Consumer Action Network, Inc.; Coalition for Family Safety, Inc.; Florida League of Conservation Voters, Inc.; Florida AFL-CIO; Association of Flight Attendants, AFL-CIO; Des Action, National; Florida State Conference of Branches of
Page 1055

788 So.2d 1055 (Fla.App. 4 Dist. 2001)

RICHARD FORUM, Appellant,
v.
BOCA BURGER, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

NO. 4D00-1255.
JANUARY TERM 2001.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT.

May 16, 2001.
Rehearing Denied Aug. 1, 2001.

 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Charles M. Greene, Judge; L.T. Case No. 00-2282 12.

 

Page 1056

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

 

Page 1057

Charles Fox Miller and James Fox Miller of Miller, Schwartz & Miller, P.A., Hollywood, for appellant.
936 So.2d 757

Molly BOWEN; Molly Bowen as Guardian of Anna Serena, David Serena, Joel Serena, Grace Clayton, and Rebecca Serena; Dorothy Bowen; Sunday Haas; Sam Blanton, III; Sam Blanton, III, as Guardian of Sam Blanton, IV; Leigh Fathauer; Jose Fernandez; and Diane Ballard; Appellants/Cross-Appellees,
v.
James D. BREWER, Walter L. Brewer, and Robert C. Brewer, Appellees/Cross-Appellants.

No. 2D05-3400.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

August 30, 2006.

Page 758

 

John Rimes, III, Tallahassee, for Appellants/Cross-Appellees.

Hank B. Campbell of Gray Robinson, P.A., Lakeland, for Appellees/Cross-Appellants.

SEALS, JAMES H., Associate Judge.
The appellants (the “Bowens”) and their attorneys appeal from a final judgment for attorney’s fees and costs in favor of James D. Brewer, Walter L. Brewer, and Robert C. Brewer (the “Brewers”) under section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2003). The trial court found that the Brewers were entitled to recover $40,428.50, one-half to be paid by the Bowens, and the other half by their attorneys.1 In its order, the trial court found that the Bowens “should have known before or shortly after suit was filed that the allegations against the
828 So.2d 414

BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE, INC., Bridgestone Corporation, S & H Firestone and Tire Super Center, Appellants,
v.
S. Renee HERRON and Larry A. Dawson, as Parents and Natural Guardians of Crystle Dawson, a Minor, Appellees.

No. 1D02-0382.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

October 4, 2002.

Page 415

 

Steven E. Stark and Christopher E. Knight of Fowler, White, Burnett, P.A., Miami, for Appellant Bridgestone Corporation.

Donald W. St. Denis and Brett A. Hastings of Anderson, St. Denis & Glenn, P.A., Jacksonville for Appellant Tire Super Center.

William F. Jung and Paul M. Sisco of Jung & Sisco, Tampa, for Appellees.

PADOVANO, J.
Bridgestone Corporation, one of the defendants in a product liability case, appeals a nonfinal order denying its motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. We find no merit to the appeal. Furthermore, we conclude that Bridgestone and its attorneys knew or should have known that the jurisdictional argument

 

951 So.2d 992

Christopher BESSEY, Appellant,
v.
Frances DIFILIPPO and Jo Difilippo, Appellees.

No. 1D06-0774.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 16, 2007.

 

James H. Daniel, Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Gail A. Stafford of the Law Office of Gail A. Stafford, Jacksonville and Elizabeth C. Wheeler of Elizabeth C. Wheeler, P.A., Orlando, for Appellees.

BENTON, J.

Christopher Bessey, plaintiff below, appeals an order awarding him only part of the taxable costs he sought, even though judgment had been entered in his favor in

[951 So.2d 993]
the single-count negligence action he brought against Frances and Jo Difilippo. Section 57.041(1), Florida Statutes (2005), does not authorize reduction or apportionment of costs on grounds that the plaintiff recovered-on the only count sued on-less than all of the damages the complaint prayed for. The statute does not leave the award to the trial court’s discretion, but entitles the party in whose favor judgment is entered
946 So.2d 66

Gabriel Dean WALKER, individually and as guardian for his minor child Gabriel Alexander Walker, Appellant,
v.
CASH REGISTER AUTO INSURANCE OF LEON COUNTY, INC., Appellee.

No. 1D05-4321.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

December 22, 2006.

Page 67

 

James Garrity of Marie A. Mattox, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Patrick A. Raley and Jed Berman of Infantino and Berman, Winter Park, for Appellee.

VAN NORTWICK, J.

Gabriel Dean Walker appeals an order awarding attorney’s fees and costs to Cash Register Auto Insurance of Leon County, Inc., pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes, and 42 U.S.C.1988(c). For the reasons that follow, we reverse in part, affirm in part, and certify conflict with Maxwell Building Corp. v. Euro Concepts, LLC, 874 So.2d 709 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).

Factual and Procedural Background

 

 

Page 114

765 So.2d 114 (Fla.App. 1 Dist. 2000)

JOHNNIE DAVIS, APPELLANT,
v.
BILL WILLIAMS AIR CONDITIONING AND HEATING, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE.

NO. 1D99-2365.

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA, FIRST DISTRICT.

June 6, 2000.
Rehearing Denied July 28, 2000.

 

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Michael R. Weatherby, Judge.

James C. Cumbie, Jacksonville, for Appellant.

William G. Cooper and Tracy K. Arthur of Cooper, Ridge & Beale, P.A., Jacksonville, for Appellee.

Browning, J.

Appellant seeks review of the trial court’s order denying attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes, after Appellant was voluntarily dismissed as a party below after discovery proceedings had been conducted and Appellant had pending a motion for summary judgment. Finding no factual basis for the allegations against Appellant, we reverse the trial court’s order denying attorney’s fees as an abuse of discretion.

 

 

920 So.2d 1264

Clivens GOLDMAN, Appellant,
v.
Rose G. CAMPBELL, Appellee.

No. 4D04-4920.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 1, 2006.

 

Arnold R. Ginsberg of Ginsberg & Schwartz, Miami, and Nicole S. Freedlander of Nelson & Freedlander, Miami, for appellant.

Richard A. Sherman of the Law Offices of Richard A. Sherman, Fort Lauderdale, and Samuel Tyler Hill of Hill & Lemongello, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

Page 1265

TAYLOR, J.

Clivens Goldman, the plaintiff below, timely appeals the denial of his motion for attorney’s fees and costs. His motion for fees and costs was filed pursuant to section 768.79, Florida Statutes, after he recovered a net verdict/judgment in an amount twenty-five percent greater than his Proposal for Settlement. The trial court denied the plaintiff’s motion because the proposal did not cite the statutory provision upon which the proposal was made. We reverse with directions to grant the plaintiff’s motion for attorney’s fees.

 

 

MEMORANDUM OF LAW

 

To:

 

From: John R. Thomas

 

Section 57.105, Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent part:

 

(1) Upon the court’s initiative or motion of any party, the court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee to be paid to the prevailing party in equal amounts by the losing party and the losing party’s attorney on any claim or defense at any time during a civil proceeding or action in which the court finds that the losing party or the losing party’s attorney knew or should have known that a claim or defense when initially presented to the court or at any time before trial:

 

(a) Was not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim or defense; or

 

(b) Would not be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts.

 

The language in bold is emphasized because: 1) use of the verb “shall” indicates the judge lacks discretion in the matter and award is mandatory if the criteria for an award of fees are met; and 2) “not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim” has been interpreted in a harsh and demanding way as explained below.

 

In Albritton v. Ferrera, 913 So.2d 5 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005), the First District interpreted the version of Section 57.105 that existed after 1999 amendments to the statute, and exists today, stating:
When Albritton and his counsel filed their motion for section 57.105 fees, the statute had been amended by the 1999 legislature. The 1999 version lowered the bar a party must overcome before becoming entitled to attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes. See Wendy’s of N.E. Fla., Inc. v. Vandergriff, 865 So.2d 520 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); Mullins v. Kennelly, 847 So.2d 1151, 1155 n. 4 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). Specifically,

 

Page 365

761 So.2d 365 (Fla.App. 3 Dist. 2000)

ANA LAURA ARELLANO AND JORGE ARELLANO, APPELLANTS,
V.
LISETTE ARELLANO BISSON AND RANDOLPH J. BISSON, APPELLEES.

NOS. 3D99-2361, 3D99-2349.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 5, 2000.
Rehearing Denied July 12, 2000.

 

Appeals from non-final orders of the Circuit Court of Dade County, Philip Bloom, Judge. LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. 92-22083.

 

Page 366

Merrill & Pollack and Gary W. Pollack; Linda L. Carroll, for appellants.

Fulvia A. Morris, for appellees.

Before Cope, Shevin and Sorondo, JJ.

Shevin, Judge.

 

 

Page 1241

484 So.2d 1241

11 Fla. L. Weekly 112

Nancy FINKELSTEIN, et vir., Petitioners,
v.
NORTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT, etc., et al., Respondents.

No. 66160.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 20, 1986.

 

Page 1242

 

Joel D. Eaton and Joel S. Perwin of Podhurst, Orseck, Parks, Josefsberg, Eaton, Meadow and Olin, P.A., and Spence, Payne, Masington, Grossman and Needle, P.A., Miami, for petitioners.

Ellen Mills Gibbs of Gibbs and Zei, P.A., and William D. Ricker, Jr. of Fleming, O’Bryan and Fleming, Ft. Lauderdale, for respondents.

ADKINS, Justice.

We have for review North Broward Hospital District v. Finkelstein, 456 So.2d 498 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), which directly and expressly conflicts with Young v. Altenhaus, 448 So.2d 1039 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), quashed on other grounds 472 So.2d 1152 (Fla.1985). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.

 

 

826 So.2d 423

Richard H. GAHN, Virginia A. Walker, John Sapanski and Elizabeth Sapanski, his wife, Michael Massey and Havalyn Massey, his wife, and Ardith Rutland Appellants,
v.
HOLIDAY PROPERTY BOND, LTD. and HPB Management, Ltd., Appellees.

No. 2D01-5613.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

August 9, 2002.

Rehearing Denied September 30, 2002.

Page 424

 

Murray B. Silverstein of the Law Offices of Murray B. Silverstein, P.A., for Appellants.

Page 425

Joseph W. Fleece, III, and Charles W. Gerdes of Holland & Knight LLP, St. Petersburg, for Appellees.

STRINGER, Judge.

Appellants challenge a nonfinal order denying their motion for attorney’s fees and costs filed pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2000). We reverse.

Background

 

 

960 So.2d 900

EASTERN INDUSTRIES, INC., (“Eastern Industries”), Appellant,
v.
FLORIDA UNEMPLOYMENT APPEALS COMMISSION, and Mary E. Herron, Appellees.

No. 1D06-4783.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 20, 2007.

[960 So.2d 901]

 

Kevin D. Obos and Robert C. Jackson, of Harrison, Sale, McCloy, Thompson & Duncan, Panama City, for Appellant.

James Garrity, of Marie A. Mattox, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the award of unemployment benefits without comment, but write to explain our award of fees to Claimant as authorized by section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2006). Claimant moved for such fees in a timely manner, as contemplated in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.400. We grant that motion.

Section 57.105 authorizes a trial court to award fees and costs when the losing party or the losing party’s attorney knew or should have known that a claim or defense when initially presented to the court or at any time before trial: (a) Was not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim or defense; or (b) Would not be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts.

 

 

LaHart Ruling.pdf
06-1642F DOAH Case # Centex Homes vs. Florida Wildlife Federation
****************

MARTIN COUNTY CONSERVATION ALLIANCE
and 1000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA, INC., Appellants,
v.
MARTIN COUNTY, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,
MARTIN ISLAND WAY, LLC, and ISLAND WAY, LC, Appellees.

CASE NO. 1D09-4956

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

Opinion filed November 4, 2011

 

An appeal from the Department of Community Affairs.
Charles Gauthier, Director, Division of Community Planning.
Richard Grosso, Jason Totoiu, and Robert Hartsell of Everglades Law Center, Inc., Ft. Lauderdale, for Appellants.
Stephen Fry, County Attorney, and David A. Acton, Senior Assistant County Attorney, Stuart, for Appellee Martin County.
Richard Shine and L. Mary Thomas, Assistant General Counsels, Department of Community Affairs, Tallahassee, for Appellee Department of Community Affairs.
William L. Hyde of Gunster, Yoakley & Stewart, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellees/Intervenors Martin Island Way, LLC, and Island Way, LC.
Page 2

 

 

state of florida

dIVISiON OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

 

RALPH SEXTON AND RANCH MANAGEMENT

CONSULTANTS, INC.

 

Petitioners,

v. DOAH Case No. 10-0009

 

WILD TURKEY ESTATES OF VERO, LLC AND

ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

 

Respondents.

/

 

 

PETITIONERS’ MEMORANDUM OF LAW REGARDING AUTHORITY TO AWARD FEES UNDER SECTION 57.105 FLORIDA STATUTES SOLELY AGAINST AN ATTORNEY
Petitioners Ralph Sexton and Ranch Management Consultants, Inc., by and through
03-4258F DOAH Case # Department of Transportation vs. Megan South, Inc.

 

 

98-2883F DOAH Case # James Newberry Jr. vs. Board of Othotists and Prosthetists
06-1900F DOAH Case # Donna M. Cameron Connolly vs. Department of Health, Board of Nursing
91-7571F DOAH Case # Redi-Care Home Services, Inc. vs. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
************************** 10-0009 Ralph Sexton and Ranch Management Consultants vs. Wild Turkey States and St. Johns River Water Management District
920 So.2d 180

Donald R. PEYTON, Appellant,
v.
Clyde HORNER and Nicolette Horner, Appellees.

No. 2D04-5710.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 10, 2006.

Page 181

 

Donald R. Peyton, pro se.

John K. Renke, II, New Port Richey, for Appellees.

NORTHCUTT, Judge.

Attorney Donald Peyton challenges the award of attorney’s fees against him pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes. We reverse because Peyton did not know, nor should he have known, that the claim he raised on behalf of his client was not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim.1

Peyton represented the Forest Lake Estates Civic Association of Port Richey, Inc., in a suit against Clyde and Nicolette Horner. The civic association sought an injunction to prevent the Horners from violating certain deed restrictions imposed on their subdivision, Forest Lake Estates Unit Four. The circuit court entered a judgment in the Horners’ favor. Then, on the Horners’ motion, it awarded attorney’s fees under section 57.105. This statute

 

 

05-4644F DOAH Case # Spanish Oaks of Central Florida vs. Lake Region Audubon Society

 

 

******* 11-3428FC DOAH Case # Robert A. Schweickert Jr. vs. Citrus County and Department of Community Affairs and Citrus Mining and Timber
10 So.3d 670

ANCHOR TOWING, INC. and Miguel De Grandy, P.A., Appellants,
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION and Sunshine Towing, Inc., Appellees.

No. 3D08-1720.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 22, 2009.

[10 So.3d 671]

 

Miguel A. De Grandy, Coral Gables, for appellants.

Berger Singerman and John C. Shawde, Miami, for Sunshine Towing, Inc.; C. Denise Johnson, Tallahassee, Assistant General Counsel, Florida Department of Transportation, for appellees.

Before GERSTEN, C.J., and COPE and SUAREZ, JJ.

SUAREZ, J.

Anchor Towing, Inc., seeks to reverse the administrative final order awarding Sunshine Towing, Inc.’s attorney’s fees under section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2005). We find that Sunshine did not comply with the mandatory notice requirements of section 57.105 and, therefore, reverse and remand.
This final chapter of the long and contentious dispute between these two parties arises out of Anchor and Sunshine’s competing bids to be awarded the Florida Department of Transportation’s contract to provide
946 So.2d 66

Gabriel Dean WALKER, individually and as guardian for his minor child Gabriel Alexander Walker, Appellant,
v.
CASH REGISTER AUTO INSURANCE OF LEON COUNTY, INC., Appellee.

No. 1D05-4321.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

December 22, 2006.

Page 67

 

James Garrity of Marie A. Mattox, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Patrick A. Raley and Jed Berman of Infantino and Berman, Winter Park, for Appellee.

VAN NORTWICK, J.

Gabriel Dean Walker appeals an order awarding attorney’s fees and costs to Cash Register Auto Insurance of Leon County, Inc., pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes, and 42 U.S.C.1988(c). For the reasons that follow, we reverse in part, affirm in part, and certify conflict with Maxwell Building Corp. v. Euro Concepts, LLC, 874 So.2d 709 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004).

Factual and Procedural Background

 

 

 

 

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *