PASTON & COFFMAN, M.D.S., P.A., D/B/A VISUAL HEALTH & SURGICAL CENTER, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE,
v.
LAWRENCE KATZEN, M.D., 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.
A trial court confirmed an arbitration award of attorney's fees to the appellant, finding that the parties had stipulated during arbitration proceedings that the arbitrators could determine entitlement to and amount of fees. The Fourth District affirmed, holding that absent a transcript contradicting the arbitrators' specific factual finding of a stipulation, the trial court properly accepted the award.
The trial court did not err in confirming the arbitrators' award. Absent a transcript indicating otherwise, the trial court properly accepted the arbitrators' specific factual finding that the parties had stipulated during proceedings that arbitrators could determine attorney's fees issues. Trial courts must accept arbitrators' findings and awards absent acknowledged grounds for vacation.
[1] Parties to an arbitration agreement may confer authority on arbitrators to determine a party's entitlement to and the amount of attorney's fees.
[2] A trial court must accept an arbitrator's findings and award absent grounds for vacating the award.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“parties to an arbitration may confer authority on the arbitrators to determine a party's entitlement to and the amount of such fees”
Establishes the fundamental principle that arbitrators can be authorized to award attorney's fees if parties agree.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePaston & Coffman and Dr. Katzen were parties to an arbitration. The parties' written arbitration agreement ambiguously specified that arbitrators shou…
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 Grounds For Vacating Arbitration Award cases and more on FLexlaw
STONE, Judge.
We affirm a final judgment confirming an arbitration award of attorney’s fees to appellant as the prevailing party. This court, sitting en banc in Pierce v. J.W. Charles-Bush Securities, Inc., 603 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), has recognized that parties to an arbitration may confer authority on the arbitrators to determine a party’s entitlement to and the amount of such fees.
The appellant argues that here the trial court erred in confirming the award of fees because a specific agreement that the arbitrators may award fees does not appear in the record. The record of the arbitration proceedings prior to the arbitrators’ determination of appellee’s entitlement to fees has not been transcribed. Each party contends that payment for a full transcript was the other party’s burden. The appellant also asserts that it cannot be expected to demonstrate a negative (no stipulation). However, the arbitrators did make a very specific finding of fact that the parties and counsel for appellant did stipulate, in the course of the arbitration proceedings, that the arbitrators could make all determinations and findings on issues raised “including the issue of entitlement and quantum for attorney’s fees.” The arbitrators additionally noted that both sides demanded fees as the prevailing party in their pleadings.1 The trial court, following a hearing at which no new evidence was provided, confirmed the arbitrators’ findings and award.
We conclude that it was not error for the trial court to accept the specific finding by the arbitrators, in the absence of a transcript indicating otherwise, that the parties had entered into a stipulation in the course of the arbitration proceedings. Such confirmation is in accord with the general obligation of a trial court to accept the arbitrators’ findings and award, in the absence of one of the acknowledged grounds for vacating such an award. See e.g. Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega, 542 So. 2d 1327 (Fla.1989). The record before us is therefore inadequate to demonstrate error. Cf. Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla.1979).
The additional issue was resolved by Insurance Co. of North America v. Acousti Engineering Co., 579 So. 2d 77 (Fla.1991).
DELL and WARNER, JJ., concur. . The parties' written arbitration agreement only ambiguously specified that the arbitrators should award all “expenses” incurred by the prevailing party.
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
PER CURIAM.
We grant the motion for rehearing and amend our opinion to certify that our decision is in conflict with Fridman v. Citicorp Real Estate, Inc., 596 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). We also clarify that the issue on cross appeal is affirmed. In all other respects, our initial opinion remains unchanged.
DELL, STONE and WARNER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
GCA, Inc. v. 90 S.W. 8TH ST. Enters., Inc., 696 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…ial court’s factual finding that the parties had agreed to permit the arbitrator to decide the issue of attorney’s fees was based on substantial, competent evidence. Turnberry, 651 So. 2d at 1175. Lastly, in Paston & Coffman, M.D.S., P.A. v. Katzen, 610 So. 2d 512, 513 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), the Fourth District upheld the arbitrator’s award of attorney’s fees where the arbitrators made “a very specific finding that the parties and counsel for appellant did stipulate, in the course of arbitration proceedings, th…
-
Barry v. Dorfman, 613 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed upon authority of Pierce v. J.W. Charles-Bush Sec., Inc., 603 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Paston & Coffman v. Katzen, 610 So. 2d 512 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), amended on reh’g (Fla.App. 4th DCA Jan. 27, 1993). HERSEY and DELL, JJ., and DOWNEY, JAMES C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)
- Schnurmacher Holding, Inc. v. Noriega, 542 So. 2d 1327 (Fla. 1989)
- Ins. Co. OF N. Am. v. Acousti Eng'g Co. OF Fla., 579 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 1991)
- Pierce v. J.W. Charles-Bush Sec., Inc., 603 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)
- Fridman v. Citicorp Real Est., Inc., 596 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)