JAMES DEXTER BROWN, A/K/A ANTHONY WILLIAMS, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By (17 total)

• Thornber v. City OF Fort Walton Beach, 568 So. 2d 914 (Fla. 1990)
  …prerequisite to an award of attorney’s fees where the statute provides that they will inure to the prevailing party. Metropolitan Dade County v. Evans, 474 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); State Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Hall, 409 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). There must be some end to the litigation on the merits so that the court can determine whether the party requesting fees has prevailed. Simmons v. Schimmel, 476 So. 2d 1342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985), review denied, 486 So. 2d 597 (Fla.1…
• Sans Souci v. Div. OF Fla. Land Sales & Condos., 421 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)
  …minations with regard to a statute’s interpretation and applicability will normally be accorded great deference, unless there is clear error or conflict with the intent of a statute. See State, Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services v. Hall, 409 So. 2d 193, 195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Harris Corp. v. Department of Revenue, 409 So. 2d 91, 93 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (Ervin, J., specially concurring); ABC Liquors v. Department of Business Regulation, 397 So. 2d 696, 697 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). “In such a case, the…
• Simmons v. Lawrence Schimmel, M.D., 476 So. 2d 1342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)
  …h ed. 1979). Thus, the plain and ordinary meaning of “prevailing party” requires that there be some end or finality to the litigation on the merits. In rendering this decision we are mindful of our pronouncement in State, Department of HRS v. Hall, 409 So. 2d 193, 195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), that “a merits determination is not a prerequisite to an award of attorney's fees where the statute provides that they will inure to the party who prevails.” We point out, however, that in Hall and the cases that have quoted…

Authorities Cited

• State v. Hegstrom, 401 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1981)