LEE COUNTY, A POLITICAL SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
SANDRA EATON AND PETER A. GURRY, RESPONDENTS
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.
Lee County sought review of an order requiring it to pay for an indigent appellant's appellate transcript in a civil case. The court reversed, holding that a county has no obligation to subsidize transcripts for indigent parties in ordinary civil actions, despite the indigent's entitlement to certain court services without charge.
A county cannot be required to pay for a transcript in a typical civil action filed by an indigent person, despite the indigent's entitlement to some court services without charge. The statutory right to free services does not extend to county-subsidized transcripts from official court reporters in civil cases.
[1] A county cannot be compelled to pay for an appellate transcript in an ordinary civil action, even if the successful appellant is indigent.
[2] The statutory right of an indigent person to free court services does not extend to requiring a county to pay for transcripts in typical civil actions.
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“The fact that the successful appellant may be indigent is not a basis to require a county to pay for a transcript in an ordinary civil action.”
States the core holding that indigency does not obligate counties to subsidize transcripts in civil cases.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSandra Eaton sued Peter Gurry for quantum meruit damages in circuit court and lost at trial. On appeal, Eaton succeeded and the appellate court revers…
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 Taxation Of Appellate Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
ALTENBERND, Judge.
Lee County has filed a petition for certiorari, which we elect to treat as a motion to review a cost order. See Fla.RApp.P. 9.400(c). We reverse the order to the extent that it requires Lee County, a nonparty to this civil action, to pay for an appellate transcript. The fact that the successful appellant may be indigent is not a basis to require a county to pay for a transcript in an ordinary civil action.
Sandra Eaton sued Peter A. Gurry for monetary damages in the circuit court for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit. The action alleged that Ms. Eaton was entitled to recover the value of her services to Mr. Gurry under quantum meruit. The trial court denied the claim after a nonjury trial. This court reversed that judgment in Eaton v. Gurry, 627 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).
On remand, Ms. Eaton filed a motion in the circuit court seeking taxation of her appellate costs under rule 9.400(a). Without notice to Lee County, the trial court entered an order requiring it to pay for the cost of the transcript on appeal. Lee County filed a motion to vacate this order, which the trial court granted because of the lack of notice.
The trial court concluded, however, that it must require Lee County to pay for this transcript because Ms. Eaton was indigent and was entitled to certain services of the court system without charge under section 57.081(1), Florida Statutes (1993).
Thus, it entered a new order compelling Lee County to pay $903.80 to the court reporter for the transcript used in the appeal. Lee County seeks review of this order. Although an indigent person is entitled to receive some services of the court system without charge, this statutory right has never been interpreted to require a county to pay for a transcript in a typical civil action filed by an indigent person in that county’s circuit court.
Section 57.081(1) specifies that an indigent person is entitled to free services from “the courts, sheriffs, and clerks.” No reference in that statute is made to county-subsidized services from the official court reporter, nor is there any reference to free transcripts in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.430. Further, there is no constitutional right to a free transcript in such an appeal. Smith v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 573 So. 2d 320 (Fla.1991).
The trial court’s reliance on Daniels v. State, 441 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), is misplaced. That ease involves the cost of transcripts for an indigent defendant’s criminal appeal. Such costs incurred by the public defender’s office are governed by statutes and rules that are not applicable to a typical civil case. See § 27.54(3), Fla.Stat. (1993); Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(d); Shuman v. State, 358 So. 2d 1333 (Fla.1978).
Reversed and remanded.
THREADGILL, A.C.J., and BLUE, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Alexander v. Bamash, 814 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…reporter to prepare the transcript at no cost to him. We deny appellant’s motion requesting a free transcript, because there is no constitutional or statutory right to one in an appeal by an indigent litigant in a civil case. Lee County v. Eaton, 642 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). As to the record, section 57.081(1), Florida Statutes (2001) provides: Any indigent person ... who is a party ... shall receive the services of the courts, sheriffs, and clerks, -with respect to such proceedings, without char…
Authorities Cited
- Arrie Lee Shuman v. State, 358 So. 2d 1333 (Fla. 1978)
- Smith v. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 573 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 1991)
- Daniels v. State, 441 So. 2d 186 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Lathrop v. Dorinda E. Lathrop, 627 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)
- Eaton v. Gurry, 627 So. 2d 1317 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)