KARL A. AND MARY E. GOELLNER, APPELLANTS,
v.
DONALD E. AND MITA KEMP, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellants challenge the trial court’s failure to award them damages in this breach of contract action. They also contend that the trial court erred in failing to award them attorney’s fees and costs. We agree that the appellants should have been awarded damages after the trial court determined that the appellees had breached the parties’ mortgage agreement. Accordingly, we remand to the trial court with directions that it enter a money judgment for the appellants based on the evidence presented at trial.
We also reverse the trial court’s denial of fees and costs. In view of this disposition, the trial court shall reevaluate on remand whether the appellants now qualify as prevailing parties for the purpose of such an award. See Prosperi v.Code, Inc., 626 So. 2d 1360 (Fla.1993); Moritz v. Hoyt Enters., Inc., 604 So. 2d 807 (Fla.1992); KCIN, Inc. v. Canpro Invs., Ltd., 675 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996). We otherwise affirm the judgment under review.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions.
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and LAZZARA, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
ST. Petersburg Kennel Club v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg., 719 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…of these laws state, for example, that the Division shall have the authority to make rules which set forth the definition of poker. The appellee cites PPI, Inc. v. Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, 698 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997), as authority for upholding the rule in the instant appeal. PPI, Inc. held that the grants of authority in the statutes in that case supported the rule requiring surveillance devices in cardrooms. The spe- [*1212] rifle law implem…
-
Gretna Racing, LLC v. Dep't OF Bus. & Prof'l Reg., 178 So. 3d 15 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…s, the possession and use of which are criminal acts absent clear authorization, • which is why the statute at issue is strictly construed as opposed to expansively interpreted. PPI, Inc. v. Dep’t of Bus. & Prof'l Reg., Div. of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, 698 So. 2d 306, 308 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (“The penny-ante statute is an exception to long-standing Florida law that prohibits all such forms of gambling; as such, it is to be strictly construed.”); State v. Nourse, 340 So. 2d 966, 969 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976) (“Being an e…
-
S. Marion Real Est. Holdings, LLC v. Fla. Gaming Control Comm'n (Fla. 5th DCA 2024)…he Commission’s rules may implement. The Third District has held that section 849.086(4) was the law implemented in a valid rule requiring surveillance devices in cardrooms. See PPI, Inc. v. Dep’t of Bus. & Prof’l Reg., Div. of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, 698 So. 2d 306, 309 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). Even more instructive, the First District likewise has pointed to section 849.086(4) as a law that agency rules may implement, observing that the statute permits an agency “to regulate a cardroom’s behavior, which would incl…
Authorities Cited
- Moritz v. Hoyt Enters., Inc., 604 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 1992)
- Prosperi v. Code, Inc., 626 So. 2d 1360 (Fla. 1993)
- Kcin, Inc. v. Canpro Invs., Ltd., 675 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)