SEMINOLE COUNTY, APPELLANT,
v.
ROLLINGWOOD APARTMENTS, LTD., ETC., 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.
Seminole County appeals an attorney's fee award in an eminent domain case. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reverses the fee award, holding that the trial court's method of calculating fees violates the statutory requirements under Florida's eminent domain attorney's fee statute.
The court reversed the attorney's fee award, holding that the trial court's method of calculating fees—combining an hourly rate calculation with a generous percentage award—did not comport with statutory requirements and resulted in an excessive effective hourly rate of over $630 per hour.
[1] A trial court's method of calculating attorney's fees in an eminent domain action must comport with statutory requirements.
[2] A trial court's award of attorney's fees in an eminent domain action may be reversed if the calculation method does not comply with statutory requirements.
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“Similarly, the method used by the trial court here does not comport with the statutory requirements — the court awarded a top hourly rate plus a generous percentage award, which resulted in a fee of over $630 per hour.”
The court explains why the fee calculation violated statutory requirements and was excessive.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn July 1991, Seminole County filed a petition to condemn three parcels owned by John Reber as trustee for a road improvement project. The County depo…
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 Good Faith Estimate Of Value cases and more on FLexlaw
W. SHARP, Judge.
This is another appeal by Seminole County from an award of attorney’s fees in an eminent domain action. See Seminole County v. Delco Oil, Inc., 669 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996); Seminole County v. Clayton, 665 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). We reverse the award and remand for reconsideration pursuant to this court’s decisions in Delco Oil and Clayton.
In July 1991, Seminole County filed a petition to condemn property to improve and expand Red Bug Road. The properties to be condemned included three parcels owned by John Reber, as trustee. In September 1991, Seminole County deposited $172,200 as its good faith estimate of value for these parcels. Reber rejected this evaluation. Three years later, Reber agreed to accept $625,000 from Seminole County as full compensation.
Reber also moved to assess attorney’s fees. After a hearing was held, the trial court found that a reasonable hourly rate for the landowner’s attorney was $275 and that 140 hours were reasonably spent on the case for a total of $38,500. The court also found that counsel had received a benefit for the landowner of $452,800 over the initial offer/good faith deposit of Seminole County. To arrive at the attorney’s fees, the trial court took 25 percent of the benefit (25% x $452,800 = $113,200), multiplied it by 2 (2 x $113,200 = $226,400), added in the hourly rate of $38,500 ($226,400 + $38,500 = $264,900) and then divided this total by 3 for a fee of $88,300 ($264,900 ⅜3 = $88,300).
On appeal, Seminole County advances several constitutional challenges to the eminent domain attorney’s fee statute, section 73.092, Florida Statutes (1993). Seminole County also contends that the fee constitutes an impermissible bonus paid to eminent domain attorneys and is excessive.
This case is controlled by our recent decisions in Delco Oil and Clayton. In these cases, we rejected the County’s constitutional challenges to the attorney’s fees statute. However, we agreed with the County that the methods utilized by the trial courts in those eases did not comport with the statutory requirements of section 73.092. Similarly, the method used by the trial court here does not comport with the statutory requirements — the court awarded a top hourly rate plus a generous percentage award, which resulted in a fee of over $630 per hour. Accordingly, we reverse the fee award and remand for reconsideration under Delco Oil and Clayton.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
PETERSON, C.J., and HARRIS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pierpont v. LEE Cnty., 710 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 1998)…n opinion in which SHAW,J., concurs. . The Fifth District Court of Appeal appeared to reach a contrary conclusion in Seminole County v. Cumberland Farms, Inc., 688 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), and Seminole County v. Rollingwood Apartments, Ltd., 678 So. 2d 370 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996), when it accepted the premise that a good-faith estimate of value was a written offer, but the opinions do not reflect that the point was challenged. . The landowners suggest that the condemning authority could decline to make a…
-
LEE Cnty. v. Pierpont, 693 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…of taking pursuant to Proceedings Supplemental to Eminent Domain contained in chapter 74 has no relationship to the “written offer” contemplated by the legislature in enacting section 73.092. But see Seminole County v. Rollingwood Apartments, Ltd., 678 So. 2d 370 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). Finally, appellees, both in the trial court and here, have crafted a rather cunning argument built around an alleged violation of the Sunshine Law, section 286.011, Florida Statutes (1993), by the county attorney in his letter…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Seminole Cnty. v. Delco OIL, Inc., 669 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)
- Seminole Cnty. v. Clayton, 665 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)