METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, APPELLANT,
v.
HERBERT EVANS, JR., 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.
A police officer sued in his official capacity sought reimbursement of attorney's fees after his employer, Dade County, settled the case and obtained a dismissal with prejudice on his behalf. The court held that the officer had 'prevailed' under Florida Statutes § 111.07 and was entitled to attorney's fee reimbursement, even though the case was resolved by settlement rather than merits adjudication.
The officer prevailed within the meaning of § 111.07 and is entitled to reimbursement of attorney's fees. A merits determination is not a prerequisite to an award of attorney's fees under the statute; the final dismissal of the action operates to terminate any proceeding against the officer, satisfying the 'prevailed' requirement.
[1] A party prevails for the purpose of attorney's fees under section 111.07, Florida Statutes, when the case against them is dismissed with prejudice, even if that dismissal…
[2] A merits determination is not a prerequisite to an award of attorney's fees when the governing statute provides that fees will inure to the party who prevails.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“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”
Establishes the key legal principle that attorney's fees can be awarded without requiring the case to be decided on the merits
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHerbert Evans, Jr., a police officer, was sued in a civil damage action arising out of his official duties as a co-defendant with his employer, Metrop…
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 Prevailing Party Attorney'S Fees cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
The trial court held that the appellee, a police officer who was joined as a co-defendant with his employer, Dade County, in a civil damage action arising out of his official duties, had “prevailed” when the case against him was dismissed with prejudice pursuant to a settlement effected by the county, and that he was therefore entitled to reimbursement of his attorney’s fees under section 111.07, Florida Statutes (1983).1 See generally, Nuzum v. Valdes, 407 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Since the dismissal operated to terminate finally any proceeding against the officer, see Sacks v. Rickies, 155 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963), and, as we held in State Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Hall, 409 So. 2d 193, 195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), “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”, the order is
Affirmed.
. The section provides:
Any agency of the state, or any county, municipality, or political subdivision of the state, is authorized to provide an attorney to defend any civil action arising from a complaint for damages or injury suffered as a result of any act or omission of action of any of its officers, employees, or agents for an act or omission arising out of and in the scope of his employment or function.... If any agency of the state or any county, municipality, or political subdivision of the state is authorized pursuant to this section to provide an attorney to defend a civil action arising from a complaint for damages or injury suffered as a result of any act or omission of action of any of its officers, employees, or agents and fails to provide such attorney, such agency, county, municipality, or political subdivision shall reimburse any such defendant who prevails in the action for court costs and reasonable attorney’s fees.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thornber v. City OF Fort Walton Beach, 568 So. 2d 914 (Fla. 1990)…st Development Corp., 493 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). A determination on the merits is not a 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 prevail…
-
Simmons v. Lawrence Schimmel, M.D., 476 So. 2d 1342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…loyee had “prevailed in her appeal to the Commission” and upheld the award of attorney’s fees awarded pursuant to section 110.309(5), Florida Statutes (1979), and Florida Administrative Code Rule 22M-2.1). See also Metropolitan Dade County v. Evans, 474 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (this court upheld an award of fees pursuant to section 111.07, Florida Statutes (1983), in favor of the appellee, where the case against him was dismissed with prejudice pursuant to a settlement effected by Dade County, a codefen…
-
Walter D. Padow, M.D., P.A. v. Knollwood Club Ass'n, Inc., 839 So. 2d 744 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…. 2d 914, 919 (Fla.1990). As the supreme court explained: A determination on the merits is not a 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 prevail…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Hall, 409 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Brown v. State, 409 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Sacks v. Rickles, 155 So. 2d 400 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Reitor v. State, 407 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Nuzum v. Valdes, 407 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)