PARAMOUNT ENGINEERING GROUP, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
STUART R. MICHELSON, ESQ., OAKLAND LAKES, LTD., A FLORIDA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, GRAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, INC., A/K/A PBI/GRAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, AND WOMACK-HUMPHREYS ARCHITECTS, INC., APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Attorney'S Charging Lien cases and more on FLexlaw
POLEN, Judge.
Paramount Engineering Group appeals from a final order assessing attorney’s fees against it pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1995). We reverse.
Attorney’s fees were assessed against Paramount and awarded to attorney Stuart Michelson pursuant to section 57.105, after Michelson prevailed in his action to foreclose on his attorney’s charging lien. In Paramount Engineering Group, Inc. v. Oakland Lakes, Ltd., 685 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), however, this court reversed the trial court’s order foreclosing the attorney’s charging lien as the trial court erred in denying Paramount’s request for a jury trial on its malpractice counterclaim. Since Michelson has lost his prevailing party status, it follows that the trial court erred in finding the absence of any justiciable issue in awarding section 57.105 fees to Michelson. We reverse the award of attorney’s fees accordingly, and remand for further proceedings pending the outcome of the main case.
PARIENTE, J., and TAYLOR, CAROLE Y., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cummings v. Cummings, 719 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…the final judgment because he could not afford to pay it. He argues that his petition for bankruptcy constituted a substantial change in circumstances that precluded him from paying the additional support. While we indicated in Cummings v. Cummings, 685 So. 2d 101, 101-02 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), that the husband’s bankruptcy was an impediment to making the equitable distribution payment, that holding does not apply to child support payments. The husband did not introduce any evidence indicating that the pending…
-
Cummings v. Cummings, 37 So. 3d 287 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…post judgment proceedings marking this case,1 we are now asked to decide whether the remedy of contempt [*289] was properly denied on the basis that payments required by the final judgment were not in the nature of support. In Cummings v. Cummings, 685 So. 2d 101 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997), we had directed the trial Judge to determine two things: what portion of a purge amount was necessary for support, and his current ability to pay such amount. An order prepared by the judge who signed the final judgment clarifie…1 / 2
-
Cummings v. Cummings, 244 F.3d 1263 (11th Cir. 2001)…t 43 days in jail, the Fourth District Court of Appeal for the State of Florida ordered him released pending a determination by the divorce court regarding what portion of the equitable distribution was "necessary for support.” Cummings v. Cummings, 685 So. 2d 101, 101 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1997). The record does not indicate that any further state court proceedings have been held. . In the Divorce Judgment, the divorce court ordered Lawrence Cummings to pay half of Susan Cummings attorneys’ fees. For the first ti…
Authorities Cited
- McLIN v. State, 685 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)
- Paramount Eng'g Grp., Inc. v. Oakland Lakes, Ltd., 685 So. 2d 11 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)