GUION T. DE LOACH, APPELLANT,
v.
CARL E. WESTMAN, INTERIM PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF MARGARET H. BENSON, DECEASED, 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.
Trial court's award of $2,750 in attorney's fees was not clearly erroneous, but remanded because the order lacked required specific findings on hourly rate, hours expended, and enhancement/reduction factors.
An attorney's fee award must include specific findings regarding hourly rate, hours reasonably expended, and any reduction or enhancement factors, even if the underlying fee amount is not clearly erroneous.
[1] Attorney's fee awards must include specific findings on hourly rate, hours reasonably expended, and appropriateness of reduction or enhancement factors, regardless of whe…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAn attorney obtained revocation of a will, removal of the personal representative, admission of another will he had prepared, and appointment of a sub…
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 Revocation Of Will cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this probate matter an attorney appeals from the order awarding the attorney $2,750 as fees for his work in obtaining the revocation of a will, the removal of the personal representative appointed pursuant to that will, the admission to probate of another will which the attorney had prepared for the decedent, and the appointment of a substitute, interim personal representative.
Although we do not conclude that the record establishes that there was reversible error in the amount of the fees awarded, the trial court failed to include in the order specific findings as to hourly rate, the number of hours reasonably expended, and the appropriateness of reduction or enhancement factors as required by Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985). See Manuel v. Manuel, 498 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Brady v. Williams, 491 So. 2d 1160 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Boyle v. Boyle, 485 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).
It does, however, appear from the record that the trial court did consider the factors which are required to be considered in the fixing of reasonable attorney’s fees. We therefore remand only for the entry of an order containing the findings required by Rowe.
LEHAN, A.C.J., and SANDERLIN and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Est. OF Lester Platt, 586 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 1991)…the determination of attorney’s fees and personal representative fees under section 733.617, Florida Statutes (1987).” Id. at 1114. We find conflict with Standard Guaranty Insurance Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So. 2d 828 (Fla.1990), De Loach v. Westman, 506 So. 2d 1142 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), and Brady v. Williams, 491 So. 2d 1160 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986).2 For the reasons expressed, we quash the decision of the district court of appeal in the instant case. The following are the pertinent facts. George A. Patterson, the at…
-
Clarkson v. U.S. Home Corp. & Epic Assocs. 81-Liii, 529 So. 2d 711 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)…h we do not conclude that the record establishes that there was reversible error in the amount of the fees awarded in either case, we must remand the cases for the entry of orders setting forth the findings required by Rowe. See De Loach v. Westman, 506 So. 2d 1142 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Remanded. SCHEB, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and LEHAN, JJ., concur.…
-
Abdalla v. Southwind, Inc., 561 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…establishes that there was reversible error in the amount of the fees awarded, we must remand for the entry of an order setting forth the findings required by Rowe. Clarkson v. U.S. Home Corp., 529 So. 2d 711 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); De Loach v. Westman, 506 So. 2d 1142 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). Affirmed in part and remanded. HALL and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.…
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
- Fla. Patient's Comp. Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985)
- Boyle v. Boyle, 485 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)
- Manuel v. Manuel, 498 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Wright v. Wright, 491 So. 2d 1160 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
- Brady v. Williams, 491 So. 2d 1160 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)