SHERWOOD MEDICAL INDUSTRIES AND GENERAL ADJUSTMENT BUREAU, APPELLANTS,
v.
GERALDINE WARD, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
An order awarding attorney's fees must state the factors considered in determining the amount of the fee. Failure to do so requires reversal.
The employer/carrier appealed a worker's compensation order awarding $17,000 to claimant's attorney. The order did not state the factors considered fo…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Factors For Determining Attorney'S Fees cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The employer/carrier appeal from a worker’s compensation order awarding a fee of $17,000 to claimant’s attorney. We reverse.
The order does not reveal any factors which were considered in determining the amount of the fee; it merely states that the parties agreed that $17,000 was a reasonable fee. The record however does not support the finding that the parties stipulated to the amount of the fee. Appellee argues that the order can still be affirmed because the record shows the award is in accordance with the guidelines set forth in Section 440.34(1), Florida Statutes (1977), and the factors set forth in Lee Engineering and Construction Company v. Fellows, 209 So. 2d 454 (Fla.1968). We disagree.
An order awarding attorney’s fees must indicate what factors were considered in determining the amount of the fee in order to comport with the requirements of Vargas v. American Bal Harbour, 345 So. 2d 1052 (Fla.1976), and Pierce v. Piper Aircraft Corporation, 279 So. 2d 281 (Fla.1973). Failure to sufficiently state the basis of the award requires reversal. State of Florida, Sunland Training Center at Miami v. Cald well, 388 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Casings, Florida, Inc. v. Williams, 389 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Manny's Dresses v. Arias, 390 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980).
In the present case, since there was no stipulation as to the amount of attorney’s fee, the deputy commissioner should have stated in the order what factors were considered in determining the amount of the fee. We do not rule on the merits of the attack on the amount of the attorney’s fee.
REVERSED and REMANDED for entry of a proper order. MILLS, C. J., JOANOS, J., and WILLIAM C. OWEN, Jr., (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Service/Division OF Blind Servs. & Div. of Risk Mgmt. v. Bean, 435 So. 2d 967 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…cured by claimant’s attorneys. Without such findings, this court is unable to give the fee award issue meaningful review. On this basis, we reverse and remand the matter to the DC for entry of a proper order. See Sherwood Medical Industries v. Ward, 397 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Casings, supra; State v. Caldwell, 388 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Manny’s Dresses v. Arias, 390 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). We express no opinion on the other issues raised on appeal, all of which relate to the fee awa…
-
Jordan v. Am. Gypsum & Associated Indus. of Fla., 627 So. 2d 557 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…dance with subsection 440.34(2) (“The amount, statutory basis, and type of benefits obtained through legal representation shall be listed on all attorney’s fees awarded by the judge of compensation claims.”). See Sherwood Medical Industries v. Ward, 397 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Casings, Florida, Inc. v. Williams, 389 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). REVERSED AND REMANDED. ZEHMER, C.J., and BOOTH and WOLF, JJ., concur.…
-
Metric Constructors, Inc. v. Boyles, 633 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…rements of law.” Jordan v. American Gypsum, 627 So. 2d 557 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Faced with such an insufficient order, this court has summarily reversed, without considering whether the amount awarded is correct. See Sherwood Medical Indus. v. Ward, 397 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Casings, Fla., Inc. v. Williams, 389 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). See also Jordan v. American Gypsum, supra. While we reaffirm the rule that section 440.34 “reflects a clear legislative intent to standardize attorney fee awar…
Authorities Cited
- Gray v. Attorney Gen., State of Fla. and/or State Attorney, Cir. Court, Volusia Cnty., Fla., 209 So. 2d 454 (Fla. 1968)
- Pierce v. Piper Aircraft Corp., 279 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 1973)
- Vargas v. Americana OF BAL Harbour, 345 So. 2d 1052 (Fla. 1976)
- State v. Caldwell, 388 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Am. Paper Chem. Prods. v. Bright, 389 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Casings v. Williams, 389 So. 2d 705 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Manny's Dresses & Parliament Ins. Co. v. Arias, 390 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Maurice v. Montgomery, 390 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)