CITY OF LIVE OAK, FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
DOROTHY HARRIS, APPELLEE
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 City of Live Oak appeals a judgment awarding Dorothy Harris $55,235 in attorney's fees under section 768.79, arguing that sovereign immunity limits under section 768.28(8) cap fees at 25% of the judgment amount. The court holds that section 768.28(8) controls over section 768.79, limiting fees to $8,145.09.
Section 768.28(8), which governs the waiver of sovereign immunity in tort cases, controls over section 768.79 and limits attorney's fees to 25% of the judgment amount. The fee award must be reduced from $55,235 to $8,145.09 (25% of $32,580.35).
[1] A statutory provision governing the waiver of sovereign immunity controls the award of attorney's fees against a governmental entity in tort cases, even when another stat…
[2] When a provision in Part I of Chapter 768 of the Florida Statutes conflicts with another provision of the Florida Statutes, the other provision shall apply.
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 government controls absolutely how much it will pay in tort claim cases”
Establishes the foundational principle that sovereign immunity limitations restrict fee awards in tort actions against government entities.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDorothy Harris sued the City of Live Oak for negligence and was awarded $32,580.35 in damages by a jury. Her demand for judgment was $15,000. The tria…
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 Offer Of Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The City of Live Oak appeals a final judgment awarding Dorothy Harris attorney’s fees in the amount of $55,235.00 after she was awarded damages of $32,580.35 in her negligence suit against the City. Fees were awarded pursuant to section 768.79, Florida Statutes (1995) because the damages awarded by the jury were more than 25% greater than her demand for judgment in the amount of $15,000. The City contends that, pursuant to subsection (8) of section 768.28, Florida Statutes (1995) governing the waiver of sovereign immunity, fees may not be awarded in excess of 25% of the judgment amount, or a total of $8,145.09. We agree and reverse.
As the court recognized in Hellmann v. City of Orlando, 634 So. 2d 245, 246 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994), “the government controls absolutely how much it will pay in tort claim cases.” Section 768.28(8) governs the award of fees against the sovereign in tort cases, and “we are bound by the statute limiting the award of attorney’s fees.” Id.
We acknowledge Harris’ argument that section 768.79(1) was substantially reworded in 1990 to begin “In any civil action for damages filed in the courts of this state ...” Ch. 90-119, § 48, Laws of Fla. Although Harris contends that this language requires section 768.79(1) to take precedence over any contrary statutory provision, her argument ignores the clear legislative intent expressed in section 768.71:
(1) except as otherwise specifically provided, this part applies to any action for damages, whether in tort or in contract ...
(3) if a provision of this part is in conflict with any other provision of the Florida Statutes, such other provision shall apply.
Therefore section 768.28(8) controls over section 768.79. See Kirkland v. Allstate Ins. Co., 655 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).
We sympathize with Harris’ further argument that, in the event a plaintiff should become liable for attorney’s fees in favor of the sovereign under section 768.79, the plaintiff would be responsible for the full amount of the fee, but that same plaintiff, in the event she prevails under section 768.79, would not be entitled to recover her full attorney’s fees should they exceed 25% of the judgment. However, Harris’ “remedy is in the legislature, not the courts.” Hellmann, 634 So. 2d at 246.
REVERSED and REMANDED with directions that the trial court enter an amended final judgment awarding attorney’s fees in the amount of $8,145.09.
JOANOS and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur. WOLF, J., concurs in result only.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Searcy Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. v. State, 194 So. 3d 349 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)…re in hopes that it, in its grace, will provide funds for the benefit of the claimant.- . Our sister courts have commented in cases involving section 768.28(8), Appellants’ “remedy is in the legislature, not the courts.” City of Live Oak v. Harris, 702 So. 2d 276, 277 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (quoting Hellman v. City of Orlando, 634 So. 2d 245, 246 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)).…
-
UCF Athletics Ass'n Inc. v. Enock Plancher, 121 So. 3d 616 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)…8(5) and (8), Florida Statutes, to 25% of the judgment. See Hellmann v. City of Orlando, 634 So. 2d 245, 246 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (attorney fee award limited to 25% of the judgment under sovereign immunity waiver statute); City of Live Oak v. Harris, 702 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997) (holding in action against governmental entity trial court cannot award attorney’s fees exceeding 25% of the final judgment). Furthermore, the total amount of the judgment, inclusive of attorney’s fees and costs, cannot exceed the…
Authorities Cited
- Jack E. Kirkland and wife Ramona Kirkland v. Allstate Ins. Co., 655 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)
- Hellmann v. City OF Orlando, 634 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)