ROBERT REVITZ, APPELLANT,
v.
ROY A. TERRELL, JR., ET AL., 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.
The court reversed the trial court's judgment for defendants and attorneys' fees award because the trial court failed to follow the law of the case established in the prior appeal, and remanded with instructions to enter judgment for plaintiff with zero dollars and award plaintiff attorney's fees as the prevailing party.
The trial court on remand must follow the law of the case established in the prior appeal and enter judgment for the plaintiff.
[1] When a trial court on remand fails to follow the law of the case established in a prior appellate decision, the appellate court will reverse and remand with instructions…
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 intelligenceRobert Revitz appealed a final judgment in favor of defendants Terrell, Terrell, Egan, Inc., and Buchanan, as well as an order awarding defendants $18…
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 Law Of The Case Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
On consideration of appellant’s motion for rehearing, we withdraw the opinion dated December 29, 1992, 611 So. 2d 1293, and substitute the following opinion:
The plaintiff, Robert Revitz, appeals from a final judgment in favor of the defendants, Roy A. Terrell, Jr., Charlyne S. Terrell, A.F. “Jerry” Egan, Inc.1 and Faye Buchanan, entered by the trial court upon remand. The plaintiff also appeals from the trial court’s order awarding attorneys’ fees to the defendants in the amount of $181,000.00. We reverse.
We reverse based on our conclusion that the trial court upon remand did not follow the law of the case established in Revitz v. Terrell, 572 So. 2d 996 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). See Wood v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Dentistry, 490 So. 2d 1079 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); Brunner Enterprises, Inc. v. Department of Revenue, 452 So. 2d 550 (Fla.1984). Accordingly, we reverse the final judgment entered in favor of the defendants and the order awarding attorneys’ fees to the defendants, and remand with instructions to enter judgment in favor of the plaintiff for zero dollars. Upon remand, pursuant to the real estate contract, the plaintiff, as the prevailing party, is also to be awarded attorney’s fees.
. A.F. "Jerry” Egan, Inc. is not involved in this appeal.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Bart L. Segall v. Segall, 708 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…pends upon the relative financial circumstances of the parties, as per section 61.16, Florida Statutes (1993), and the proper inquiry is whether one spouse has a need for such fees and the other has the ability to pay them. See Montante v. Montante, 627 So. 2d 554, 556 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); see also Rosen v. Rosen, 696 So. 2d 697, 700 (Fla.l997)(court may consider all circumstances surrounding suit in awarding fees under section 61.16). The trial court found that the Husband was “completely capable to pay” the…
-
Matthews v. Matthews, 677 So. 2d 323 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…ty seeking an increase in child support need only prove a substantial change ... similar to that required ... [where] judgments ... do not incorporate a settlement agreement”); Hyatt v. Hyatt, 672 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Montante v. Montante, 627 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); § 61.14(7), Fla. Stat. (Supp. 1994). “The law is clear that the parents may not contract away the rights of their child for support.” Armour v. Allen, 377 So. 2d 798, 799-800 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) (“Child support is a right which…
-
Widder v. Widder, 673 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…ative financial circumstances of the parties as per section 61.16 and the cases interpreting it, and using the appropriate inquiry of whether one party has the need for such fees and the other party has the ability to pay them. Montante v. Montante, 627 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). We thus reverse for the trial court to make this determination, and further direct that the court’s ruling be based on the existing record, to avoid the necessity of further hearings and expense to the parties. GLICKSTEIN and S…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Brunner Enters., Inc. v. Dep't OF Revenue of the State of Fla., 452 So. 2d 550 (Fla. 1984)
- Revitz v. Terrell, 572 So. 2d 996 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Raymond H. Wood, Jr., D.D.S. v. Dep't of Prof'l Reg., 490 So. 2d 1079 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Revitz v. Terrell, 611 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)