PROTEAN INVESTORS, INC., LARRY MEINSTEIN AND JUNE MEINSTEIN, APPELLANTS,
v.
TRAVEL ETC., INC., 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.
Protean Investors appealed a post-judgment order awarding attorney's fees to Travel Etc., Inc., arguing that Travel failed to request fees in its pleadings, failed to prove entitlement at trial, and the trial court failed to reserve jurisdiction. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed, holding that attorney's fees authorized by contract may be presented for the first time after final judgment and that failure to request fees in pleadings does not defeat entitlement when raised by timely post-judgment motion.
A party may recover contractual attorney's fees through a timely post-judgment motion even if fees were not requested in initial pleadings and proof was not presented at trial. The trial court's failure to expressly reserve jurisdiction does not deprive a party of the substantive right to attorney's fees. Recent Florida Supreme Court decisions in Cheek v. McGowan and Finkelstein v. North Broward Hospital District establish that proof of attorney's fees may be presented for the first time after final judgment.
[1] A party may present proof of attorney's fees authorized by contract for the first time after final judgment pursuant to a motion for attorney's fees.
[2] A final judgment that does not expressly reserve jurisdiction does not deprive a party of the substantive right to attorney's fees.
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“proof of attorney's fees authorized by contract "may be presented for the first time after final judgment pursuant to motion for attorney's fees"”
Establishes that contractual attorney's fees need not be proven at trial but may be addressed post-judgment
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceProtean Investors and the Meinsteins were parties to a contract dispute with Travel Etc., Inc. The trial court entered a final judgment, and Travel su…
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 Reservation Of Jurisdiction For Attorney'S Fees cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Protean Investors, Inc. [Protean], seeks reversal of a post-judgment order entitling Travel Etc., Inc. [Travel], to attorney’s fees. Protean cites three bases for its position: 1) Travel’s failure to request attorney’s fees in its pleadings, 2) Travel’s failure to prove at trial its entitlement to and the amount of reasonable attorney’s fees, and 3) the trial court’s failure to reserve jurisdiction to award fees. Recent decisions of the Supreme Court of Florida in Cheek v. McGowan Elec. Supply Co., 511 So. 2d 977, 979 (Fla.1987), holding that proof of attorney’s fees authorized by contract “may be presented for the first time after final judgment pursuant to motion for attorney’s fees” (emphasis added); Finkelstein v. North Broward Hosp. Dist., 484 So. 2d 1241, 1243 (Fla.1986), deciding that a final judgment which lacks the “magic words ‘jurisdiction is reserved’ ” does not deprive a party of the “substantive right to attorney’s fees”; and of this court in Marrero v. Cavero, 400 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 411 So. 2d 383 (1981), ruling that the failure to request contractual attorney’s fees does not defeat entitlement when the issue is presented by a timely post-judgment motion, require that we affirm. We recognize that this court’s holding in Marrero differs from the result reached by other district courts of appeal. See, e.g., Altamonte Hitch & Trailer Serv., Inc. v. U-Haul Co. of Eastern Fla., 498 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Nour v. All State Pipe Supply Co., 487 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Coons v. Shriver, 429 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Brown v. Gardens By the Sea South Condominium Ass’n, 424 So. 2d 181, 182 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). However, in light of the subsequent supreme court rulings in Cheek and Finkelstein, we question the continuing validity of the foregoing decisions.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Stockman v. Downs, 573 So. 2d 835 (Fla. 1991)…So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Nour v. All State Pipe Supply Co., 487 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). The Fourth District Court of Appeal in this case and the Third District Court of Appeal in Protean Investors, Inc. v. Travel [*837] Etc., Inc., 519 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 518 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 1987), interpreted two recent decisions of this Court to allow recovery of attorney’s fees pursuant to a contract even though the claimant did not plead entitlement to such fees. In Finkelstein v.…
-
Millard v. Brannan, 553 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)…n a party fails to plead or prove its entitlement to such an award. Coons v. Shriver, 429 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). We recognize that this holding is in conflict with the third district’s decision in Protean Investors, Inc. v. Travel Etc., Inc., 519 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 518 So. 2d 1277 (Fla.1987). Protean Investors relies on the cases of Cheek v. McGowan Electric Supply Co., 511 So. 2d 977 (Fla.1987) and Finkelstein v. North Broward Hospital District, 484 So. 2d 1241 (Fla.1986) to supp…
-
Bowman v. Corbett, 556 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…ere may be no recovery of attorney’s fees when a party fails to plead its entitlement to such an award. See Millard v. Braman, 558 So. 2d 1248 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989) and disagree with the Third District, see Protean Investors, Inc. v. Travel Etc., Inc., 519 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1987), rev. denied, 518 So. 2d 1277 (Fla.1987). Since this court has not receded from Altamonte Hitch, and the holding in that case has not been overruled by the supreme court, the circuit court was bound to follow that precedent. Find…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Finkelstein v. N. Broward Hosp. Dist., 484 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 1986)
- Brown v. Gardens BY THE SEA S. Condo. Ass'n, 424 So. 2d 181 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- Cheek v. McGOWAN Elec. Supply Co., 511 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1987)
- Nour v. ALL State Pipe Supply Co., 487 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Altamonte Hitch & Trailer Serv., Inc. v. U-Haul Co. OF E. Fla., 498 So. 2d 1346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)
- Coons v. Wilmer P. Shriver and Katherine W. Shriver, 429 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)
- Stoner v. Dep't of Prof'l Regulation/Construction Indus. Licensing Bd., 429 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Dep't OF Bus. Reg. v. Palace BAR & Lounge, Inc., 400 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Marrero v. Cavero, 400 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)