This appeal is from the district court’s orders of October 2, 2006 and October 1, *922 2007, which collectively rejected appellants’ applications for “reasonable costs and attorney’s fees” pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 768.79, “excess costs, expenses, and attorney’s fees” pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927, and sanctions, in the form of attorney’s fees and costs, pursuant to the district court’s inherent power. Appellants contend that the district court misapplied §§ 768.79 and 1927 to the facts before it and therefore abused its discretion in denying their applications.

We are not persuaded. We conclude that the court properly read the case law interpreting § 768.79 and rightly concluded that appellants failed to satisfy its no-liability judgment -with prejudice requirement. The court also understood what must be shown to obtain sanctions under § 1927 and the court’s inherent power and committed no abuse of discretion in refusing to impose the sanctions appellants requested.

AFFIRMED.