ATLANTIS BUILDING B CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
JOHN A. SKAWSKI AND WANDA SKAWSKI, HIS WIFE, FREDERICK L. ANDREOLI AND MARY M. ANDREOLI, HIS WIFE, AND RAYMOND B. TIMM AND SUZANNE TIMM, 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.
Trial court's award of attorney's fees with a contingency risk multiplier of 2 was reversed because the court failed to provide adequate findings of fact to support the multiplier under Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe.
A trial court must provide specific findings of fact supporting the application of a contingency risk multiplier in attorney's fees awards, not merely conclusory statements.
[1] Trial courts awarding attorney's fees with a contingency risk multiplier must provide specific findings of fact supporting the multiplier rather than conclusory statement…
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 intelligence“this court should consider the contingency risk factor and it feels a multiplier of 2 to be reasonable”
The trial court's statement in its final judgment regarding the contingency risk multiplier, which the appellate court found insufficient.
The trial court awarded attorney's fees to the appellees in a condominium association dispute and applied a contingency risk multiplier of 2 to the lo…
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 Findings Of Fact Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellants claim that the trial court erred when it entered final judgments awarding attorney’s fees without findings to support its application of a contingency risk multiplier. While we find no error in the lodestar calculation made by the trial judge, we are compelled to reverse the final judgments awarding attorney’s fees because the trial court failed to state findings to support the application of a contingency risk factor of 2. The trial court stated in its final judgments: “Therefore, this court should consider the contingency risk factor and it feels a multiplier of 2 to be reasonable.” This statement does not constitute an adequate finding under the principles enunciated in Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985). See also Travelers Indemnity v. Sotolongo, 513 So. 2d 1384 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).
Accordingly, we reverse the final judgments awarding attorney’s fees and remand this cause to the trial court with instructions to conduct such further hearings as may be necessary and to enter final judgments awarding attorney’s fees complete with findings of fact as required by Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
DELL, WALDEN and POLEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't of Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. Schick, 553 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)…ncement factor applied in awarding an attorney’s fees. Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985); Lara v. Fortune Insurance Co., 545 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Atlantis Building B Condominium Association v. Skawski, 544 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). See also Beisswenger v. Omicron Construction and Development Co., 552 So. 2d 240 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). Accordingly, we reverse the final judgments awarding attorney’s fees and remand to the trial court with instructions to conduc…
-
Swortz v. S. Rainbow Corp., 603 So. 2d 107 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…ings to support such application. See Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985), modified on other grounds, Standard Guar. Ins. Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So. 2d 828 (Fla.1990); Atlantis Bldg. B Condominium Ass’n v. Skawski, 544 So. 2d 1069, 1070 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Sotolongo, 513 So. 2d 1384 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). However, when a case is so patently frivolous as to cause counsel to represent his or her client for a fee that is solely contingent upon a section…
-
Erling Speer v. Mason, 769 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…etion, the trial judge must include findings supporting a multiplier. Absent such findings, reversal and remand are required. See Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985); Atlantis Bldg. B Condominium Ass’n v. Skawski, 544 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); Old S. Life Ins. Co. v. Kirby, 563 So. 2d 706 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990). The final judgment awarding attorney’s fees in this case contains no findings supporting either the granting of a T.5 multiplier for the attorney representing M…
Previewing 3 of 4 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)
- Travelers Indem. Co. v. Sotolongo, 513 So. 2d 1384 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)