LUCIEN METIVER, PENNEY METIVER, AND MASTER AUTO SALES, INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY & MOTOR VEHICLES; FRED O. DICKENSON, III, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY & MOTOR VEHICLES; ROBERT F. MILLIGAN, IN HIS OFFICIAL CAPACITY AS COMPTROLLER OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, 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.
The court affirmed the trial court's denial of attorney's fees to successful claimants in a forfeiture proceeding, holding that the seizing agency proceeded in good faith and did not grossly abuse its discretion.
A successful claimant in a forfeiture proceeding is not entitled to attorney's fees under § 932.704(10) unless the court finds the seizing agency failed to proceed in good faith or grossly abused its discretion.
[1] A seizing agency's good faith and absence of gross abuse of discretion in precipitating forfeiture proceedings precludes an award of attorney's fees to a successful claim…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants sought attorney's fees after the dismissal of a forfeiture action against them was affirmed on appeal. The trial court found the Department…
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 Gross Abuse Of Discretion cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
After dismissal of Appellees’ forfeiture action was affirmed on appeal, State Dep’t of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Metiver, 684 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996), Appellants sought attorney’s fees pursuant to § 932.704(10), Fla.Stat. (1995). That statute provides, in relevant part, that a successful claimant in a forfeiture proceeding is entitled to reasonable trial attorney’s fees “if the court finds that the seizing agency has not proceeded at any stage in the proceedings in good faith or that the agency’s action which precipitated the forfeiture proceedings was a gross abuse of the agency’s discretion.” § 932.704(10), Fla.Stat.
The trial court found good faith and that the department had not grossly abused its discretion in precipitating the forfeiture. Thereupon, it declined to award attorney’s fees to Appellants, with the exception of fees for three hours spent litigating an issue in which it found Appellees had no reasonable basis to argue.
We hold that the trial court’s findings were not an abuse of discretion. Cf. Hernandez v. Leiva, 391 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Sanderlen v. State, 590 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991).
Accordingly, we affirm. Cf. Stuart Yacht Club & Marina, Inc. v. State, Dep’t of Natural Resources, 625 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (attorney’s fees denied under § 120.57(l)(b)10, Fla.Stat. (1993), where some agency action was incorrect, but not flagrant or inexcusable). As to all other issues argued, we also affirm.
STONE, C.J., KLEIN, J., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
GAY v. Beary, 758 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)…rt’s ruling—absence of bad faith and no gross abuse of discretion in precipitating the forfeiture action'— is supported by competent evidence, we, as the appellate court, must affirm. See Metiver v. State, Dept. of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, 720 So. 2d 1170 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). The same evidence recited above (which has become the law of the case, and .which we found precluded entry of summary judgment in Gay’s favor on the issue of a nexus between the money and illegal drug dealing), supports the tria…
Authorities Cited
- Hernandez v. Leiva, 391 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Sanderlen v. State, 590 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Chase v. Espirito Santo Bank OF Fla., 625 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
- State of Fla. Dep't OF Hwy. & Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Lucien Metiver, 684 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)