JANET L. COOPER, APPELLANT,
v.
OWEN E. KAHN, 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.
The court held that a fee award to a guardian ad litem attorney must be supported by expert testimony and specific factual findings.
Janet Cooper appealed an order awarding $18,750.00 in fees to the attorney who served as guardian ad litem for her child. The order did not contain sp…
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 Guardian Ad Litem Fees cases and more on FLexlaw
BASKIN, Judge.
Janet Cooper appeals an order awarding fees to the attorney who served as guardian ad litem for her minor child in a dissolution proceeding. The order states that the attorney shall “recover from Janet L. Cooper the sum of $18,750.00 that shall bear interest at the rate of 12% a year for which let execution issue.” We reverse the order for several reasons.
First, the record is devoid of expert testimony establishing the reasonable value of the attorney’s services.1 Mettler v. Mettler, 569 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). In addition, the attorney failed to present competent substantial evidence to support his assertions that he spent the entire 125 hours protecting the child’s interests and that no portion of that time involved efforts to collect a previously awarded fee.2 Compare Saussy v. Saussy, 560 So. 2d 1385 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Green v. Green, 230 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970). Finally, the trial judge failed to set forth specific findings of fact concerning the requisite factors in determining a fee award as mandated by Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985), modified by, Standard Guaranty Ins. Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So. 2d 828 (Fla.1990). E.g., Garcia v. Garcia, 570 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Frechter v. Frechter, 548 So. 2d 712 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Thus, the fee award may not stand.
Reversed and remanded.
. Although Janet Cooper does not dispute that the attorney spent 125 hours on the case, the record contains no evidence as to the reasonableness and necessity of the expended time. See Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985), modified by, Standard Guaranty Ins. Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So. 2d 828 (Fla.1990).
. On remand, we direct the trial court’s attention to Meloan v. Coverdale, 525 So. 2d 935 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 536 So. 2d 243 (Fla.1988), as guidance in determining the party responsible for payment of the fee.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Metcalfe v. Metcalfe, 655 So. 2d 1251 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…e guardian from later changing his mind in view of the enor [*1254] mous amount of time and expense that he was required to expend in this case, and the extraordinary impact on the guardian’s availability to his regular law practice. Cooper ¶. Kahn, 600 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Melocm v. Coverdale, 525 So. 2d 935 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 536 So. 2d 243 (Fla.1988); see Standard Guaranty Ins. Co. v. Quan-strom, 555 So. 2d 828 (Fla.1990); cf. White v. Board of County Comm’rs, 537 So. 2d 1376, 1380 (Fla.…
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Patient's Comp. Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985)
- Standard Guar. Ins. Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 1990)
- Meloan v. Coverdale, 525 So. 2d 935 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Mettler v. Mettler, 569 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Yanks v. Amerifirst Bank, 569 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Saussy v. Saussy, 560 So. 2d 1385 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- Frechter v. Frechter, 548 So. 2d 712 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Ethlyn Rita Garcia v. Garcia, 570 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Green v. Phoebe D. Green, 230 So. 2d 492 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)