RICHARD B. GEORGE AND MYRNA Y. GEORGE, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
GLENN E. NORTHCRAFT AND DONNA L. NORTHCRAFT, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES
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.
The Georges sued the Northcrafts for breach of contract in a real estate transaction and accepted a $5,000 offer of judgment that did not reserve attorney's fees. The court held that contractual attorney's fees are integral to the damages from a breach of contract claim and are encompassed within an offer of judgment even if not explicitly mentioned, so the trial court properly denied the Georges' post-acceptance motion for attorney's fees.
A party accepting an offer of judgment may be considered a prevailing party and entitled to recover attorney's fees accruing prior to the offer. However, contractual attorney's fees are an integral part of the damages in a breach of contract suit and are encompassed within an offer of judgment, even if the offer does not specifically mention them or reserve the right to seek them later.
[1] An offer of judgment that fails to specify attorney's fees or reserve the right to seek them encompasses a contractual right to attorney's fees.
[2] Attorney's fees awarded pursuant to a contract are an integral part of the damages stemming from a breach of contract, not merely incidental costs.
Previewing 2 of 3 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 party who accepts an offer of judgment may be á "prevailing party" pursuant to Rule 1.442, and entitled to recover attorney's fees accruing prior to the offer.”
Establishes that acceptance of an offer of judgment does not automatically preclude prevailing party status for pre-offer attorney's fees.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Georges sued the Northcrafts for breach of contract relating to the sale of a house. The Northcrafts made a $5,000 offer of judgment pursuant to F…
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 Attorney'S Fees As Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
SHARP, Judge.
Richard and Myrna George appeal from a judgment which denied them an award of attorney’s fees. The Georges sued Glenn and Donna Northcraft for breach of contract relating to their sale of a house to the Georges. The Northcrafts made a $5,000.00 offer of judgment pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442,1 which failed to specify any sum for attorney’s fees, nor did it contain any provision seeking to reserve such rights. The offer was accepted by the Georges, and their subsequent motion for an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to the contract2 was denied by the trial court. We affirm.
We agree with out sister court’s holding in River Road Construction Company v. Ring Power Corp., 454 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). A party who accepts an offer of judgment may be á “prevailing party” pursuant to Rule 1.442, and entitled to recover attorney’s fees accruing prior to the offer.3 However, the award of attorney’s fees allowable pursuant to a contract right is an unliquidated4 and integral part of the damages stemming from the suit on the contract.5 As such they are not “incidental” to the cause of action, like costs.
We think the right to an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to a provision in a contract is encompassed in an offer of judgment made pursuant to Rule 1.442 which fails to mention them specifically or reserve a right to seek them later. Accordingly, the trial court ruling in this case is
AFFIRMED.
DAUKSCH and UPCHURCH, JJ., concur. . Rule 1.442 provides:
At any time more than ten days before the trial begins a party defending against a claim may serve an offer on the adverse party to allow judgment to be taken against him for the money or property or to the effect specified in his offer with costs then accrued. An offer of judgment shall not be filed unless accepted or until final judgment is rendered. If the adverse party serves written notice that the offer is accepted within ten days after service of it, either party may then file the offer and notice of acceptance with proof of service and thereupon the court shall enter judgment. An offer not accepted shall be deemed withdrawn and evidence of it is not admissible except in a proceeding to determine costs. If the judgment finally obtained by the adverse party is not more favorable than the offer, he must pay the costs incurred after the making of the offer. The fact that an offer is made but not accepted does not preclude a subsequent offer. When the liability of one party to another has been determined by further proceedings, the party adjudged liable may make an offer before trial if it is served within a reasonable time, not less than ten days, before beginning of the hearing or trial to determine the amount of extent of liability. This rule shall not apply to actions or matters related to dissolution of marriage, alimony, nonsupport or child custody.
. The contract provided typically that the “prevailing party" was entitled to a “reasonable attorney’s fee and costs" in any litigation growing out of the contract.
. See Wimbledon Townhouse Condo I Association v. Kessler, 425 So. 2d 29 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).
. B/G Amusements, Inc. v. Mystery Fun House, Inc., 381 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
. Lhamon v. Retail Development, Inc., 422 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc. v. Horowitch, 107 So. 3d 362 (Fla. 2013)…to include such a statement, and the offer would be invalid and unenforceable even if section 768.79 applied. In addition, the Eleventh Circuit relied on Unicare Health Facilities, Inc. v. Mort, 558 So. 2d 159, 161 (Fla.1989), George v. Northcraft, 476 So. 2d 758, 759 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985), and Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Co. v. Ramos, 565 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), for the proposition that an offer of settlement need not include a specific provision regarding attorney’s fees. See Horowitch, 645 F. 3d a…
-
Unicare Health Facilities, Inc. v. Mort, 553 So. 2d 159 (Fla. 1989)…tes, and obviate the need for further intervention of the judicial process. Thus, we find that the better application of the rules under these circumstances is that articulated by the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Ahmed and George v. Northcraft, 476 So. 2d 758 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). There is an “organic right of parties to contract a settlement, which by definition concludes all claims unless the contract of settlement specifies otherwise.” Ahmed, 527 So. 2d at 931. We are not persuaded by Hoak’s argument…
-
Sheikh Ahmed v. Lane Pontiac-Buick, Inc., 527 So. 2d 930 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)…that the plaintiff should not be regarded as the prevailing party on the mechanic’s lien action and thus, was not entitled to fees. The trial court’s denial of attorney fees sought via a post-settlement motion was affirmed in George v. Northcraft, 476 So. 2d 758 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). In George, this court held that the right to an award of attorney fees pursuant to a contractual provision was encompassed in an offer of judgment made pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442 even though the offer neit…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- B/G Amusements, Inc. v. Mystery FUN House, Inc., 381 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Blue Cross & Blue Shield OF Fla., Inc. v. Walters, 454 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
- Lhamon v. Retail Dev., Inc., 422 So. 2d 993 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Wimbledon Townhouse Condo. I Ass'n, Inc. v. Kessler, 425 So. 2d 29 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)