Steinhardt v. EASTERN SHORES WHITE HOUSE ASSOC., INC.
Cases that cite this one
17 later published cases cite this decision.
- Ruppel v. Gulf Winds Apartments, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)
- McKelvey v. Kismet, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)
- Royal Palm Village Residents, Inc. v. Monica Slider (11th Cir. 2023)
- Nine Island Avenue Condominium Ass'n v. Siegel (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)
- APR ENERGY, LLC v. Pakistan Power Resources, LLC (United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida 2009)
- Aksomitas v. Maharaj (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)
- Browning v. Peyton (11th Cir. 1990)
- Browning v. Peyton (11th Cir. 1990)
- General Acc. Ins. Co. v. Packal (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)
- Woodco, Inc. v. B & H Realty Corp. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)
- Bashure v. Estate of Paulk (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)
- Simmons v. Schimmel (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)
- 51 Island Way Condo. Ass'n v. Williams (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)
- Kirou v. Oceanside Plaza Condominium Association, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)
- Rosen v. Rosen (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)
- P & C THOMPSON BROS. CONST. CO. v. Rowe (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)
- Burnstein v. 5838 Condominium, Inc. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
Milton F. STEINHARDT and Gladys Goldman, Appellants,
v.
EASTERN SHORES WHITE HOUSE ASSOCIATION, INC., Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Blackwell, Walker, Gray, Powers, Flick & Hoehl and James C. Blecke, Miami, for appellants.
Michael L. Hyman and Andrew D. Kaplan, Miami, for appellee.
Before BARKDULL, DANIEL S. PEARSON and FERGUSON, JJ.
FERGUSON, Judge.
The single issue in this appeal challenges an award of attorney's fees pursuant to Section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1979).
After preparation for protracted litigation, the parties entered into a tentative settlement agreement of several claims. The terms of the settlement were discussed and agreed upon at a conference held in court. In accordance with the agreement, counsel for appellee was to, and did, prepare voluminous settlement documents. Appellants refused to complete the agreement. The trial judge refused to enforce *786 the settlement agreement because she felt she could not do so completely. After a hearing, appellants were ordered to reimburse appellee "pursuant to Chapter 57," for costs and fees incurred in the preparation of the settlement documents. The case was rescheduled for trial.
The fundamental rule in Florida is that attorney's fees are in derogation of the common law and will be granted only pursuant to contract or statute. Any statute allowing an award of fees will be strictly construed. Roberts v. Carter, 350 So.2d 78 (Fla. 1977); Sunbeam Enterprises, Inc. v. Upthegrove, 316 So.2d 34 (Fla. 1975); Sheridan v. Greenberg, 391 So.2d 234 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).
The statute in question is concise. It empowers the court to:
... award a reasonable attorney's fee to the prevailing party in any civil action in which the court finds that there was a complete absence of justiciable issue of either law or fact raised by the losing party.
In order that there be a prevailing party and a losing party, there must necessarily be a disposition of the case or controversy as by judgment or order. There can be no finding that there is a complete absence of a justiciable issue of either law or fact unless the merits of the controversy have been passed upon on the pleadings or proof, or both; there is no such finding in the record express or implicit.
The purpose of Section 57.105 is to discourage baseless claims, stonewall defenses and sham appeals in civil litigation by placing a price tag through an attorney's fee award on the losing party. Sachs v. Hoglund, 397 So.2d 447 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Construing the statute narrowly, as we must, an award of attorney's fees before the case is concluded and only because a party has frustrated a settlement agreement cannot be sustained.
Reversed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.