NORTHBROOK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
MARY ELIZABETH CLARK, APPELLEE/CROSS-APPELLANT
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 court held that certain travel, postage, photocopy, and telephone costs are not taxable, and that the trial court must itemize costs to determine taxability.
Northbrook Life Insurance Company appealed an award of attorney's fees and costs to Mary Elizabeth Clark. Clark cross-appealed the fee award, seeking …
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.
THREADGILL, Judge.
Northbrook Life Insurance Company appeals a judgment of attorney’s fees and costs awarded to Mary Elizabeth Clark. Ms. Clark cross appeals the attorney’s fee award contending she was entitled to a risk factor multiplier to enhance the amount of the fee.1 We affirm the award of attorney's fees and reverse the award of costs.
The trial court awarded costs in the amount of $3,507.89. Northbrook contends that the costs for travel, postage, photocopies, and telephone are nontaxable. Clark concedes this item and agrees to a reduction of court costs from $3,507.89, to $1,969.50.
Northbrook also contests the taxation of costs for service of process and court reporter fees. On a motion to tax costs, the trial court should consider each item of cost and determine whether it should be allowed in whole or in part or disallowed. See Allstate Insurance Company v. Jasiecki, 549 So. 2d 816 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Because Clark failed to itemize these costs, there was no way to determine whether they were all taxable.
We therefore reverse the judgment assessing costs and remand for further proceedings. We affirm the final judgment in all other respects.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part.
SCHEB, A.C.J., and HALL, J., concur. . This is the second appeal in this case. In the first appeal, we affirmed a final judgment in favor of Mrs. Clark. Northbrook Life Insurance Company v. Clark, 582 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Trial Practices, Inc. v. Hahn Loeser & Parks, LLP, 228 So. 3d 1184 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)…ss of the amounts paid to the fact witnesses. Where a trial court reviews a motion to tax costs, it “should consider each item of cost and determine whether it should be allowed in whole or in part or disallowed.” Northbrook Life Ins. Co. v. Clark, 590 So. 2d 528, 528 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). And a trial court’s failure to itemize costs, especially where a motion to tax costs is denied in part, can result in a reversal. See id. (“Because [the appellant] failed to itemize these costs, there was no Way to determine…
-
Anderson v. McDONOUGH, 189 So. 3d 266 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)…ning the absence of findings to support the amount awarded. Anderson also argues, and the Estate concedes, that the gross amount awarded as costs must be reversed. Routine overhead is not recoverable as costs. See Northbrook Life Ins. Co. v. Clark, 590 So. 2d 528, 528 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). On remand, the court shall recalculate the costs award, omitting overhead expenses. Award of attorney's fees reversed; award of costs reversed and remanded for recalculation. KHOUZAM and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Dewayne KEY v. State, 549 So. 2d 816 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
- Northbrook Life Ins. Co. v. Clark, 582 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)