FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, ON BEHALF OF BARBARA R. LUCIGNANI, APPELLANT,
v.
ALFRED LUCIGNANI, 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 Florida Department of Revenue appealed a trial court's award of attorney's fees against it and the mother in a child support arrearage case. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court improperly awarded fees for work performed in a dismissed contempt action where a justiciable issue existed, though remanded for consideration of whether fees were warranted for misconduct in later proceedings.
The trial court erred in awarding fees for work performed in the contempt action because a justiciable issue existed, as evidenced by the father's relief in beginning payments through the central depository. However, the father may be entitled to fees for misconduct during the later arrearage proceedings under the inequitable conduct doctrine.
[1] A court may not award attorney's fees under section 57.105, Florida Statutes, for work performed in prior litigation if there was a justiciable issue of law or fact in th…
[2] A justiciable issue of law or fact exists when a party receives some relief in the proceedings, even if the action is later dismissed.
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 court erred in awarding fees for the contempt action because there was a justiciable issue of law or fact as evidenced by the fact that the DOR received relief when the father began paying child support payments through the central depository.”
Establishes the core holding that attorney's fees under section 57.105 cannot be awarded when a justiciable issue exists
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBarbara and Alfred Lucignani divorced in 1976, with Barbara entitled to $300 monthly child support for their disabled daughter. In 1997, after 21 year…
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 Justiciable Issue Of Law Or Fact cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The Florida Department of Revenue (DOR), on behalf of the former wife in an action for child support arrearage, appeals the trial court’s order assessing attorney’s fees against both the DOR and the former wife pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1997). For the following reasons, we reverse.
Barbara Lucignani (the mother) and appellee Alfred Lucignani (the father) were divorced in 1976. The mother, the custodial parent of the couple’s physically and mentally disabled daughter, was entitled to receive $300 per month for lifetime support of the child. In 1997, twenty-one years later, the Florida Department of Revenue (DOR) instituted contempt proceedings against the father requesting that future payments be made through the central depository and seeking judgment against the father for $75,000, the alleged amount of the child support arrears. The father accordingly began making payments into the central depository.
After the contempt action was subsequently dismissed without prejudice for lack of prosecution, the DOR filed a Motion to Determine Arrears, which included a financial affidavit by the mother. In turn, the father filed a motion for attorney’s fees for work related to the dismissed contempt action. The trial court held a hearing on the father’s Motion for Attorney’s Fees and the DOR’s Motion to Determine Arrears. The court denied the DOR’s Motion to Determine Arrears under the doctrine of laches and assessed fees and costs under section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1997), against the mother and the DOR’s attorney, the State Attorney’s Office. The DOR appeals the attorney’s fee award.
The court apparently awarded fees as a sanction for misconduct during the arrear-age proceedings, but imposed fees billed for work performed in the prior contempt litigation. The court erred in awarding fees for the contempt action because there was a justiciable issue of law or fact 1 as evidenced by the fact that the DOR received relief when the father began paying child support payments through the central depository. Therefore, the fee award was improper. However, the father may be entitled to fees for misconduct during the latter portion of the litigation concerning the DOR’s Motion to Determine Arrears. See Bitterman v. Bitterman, 714 So. 2d 356, 365 (Fla.1998)(holding that the inequitable conduct doctrine permits award of attorney’s fees under § 57.105 where one party has exhibited egregious conduct or acted in bad faith). In short, the court erred in imposing fees attributable to the contempt proceedings.
Reversed and remanded for a determination of the father’s entitlement to an award of fees and if he is so entitled, a calculation of the amount he is due.
. The 1997 version of section 57.105, Florida Statutes, applies here because the DOR’s motion for contempt was filed prior to the effective date of the 1999 amendment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McMAHAN v. Toto, 256 F.3d 1120 (11th Cir. 2001)…f the amendment to § 57.105, the “old” version of § 57.105 would apply, which only allows sanctions where there was a “complete absence of a justiciable issue of either law or fact raised by the complaint.” See Fla. Dep’t of Revenue v. Lucignani, 775 So. 2d 996, 997 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (holding that 1997 version of § 57.105 applies because the DOR’s motion for contempt was filed before the effective date of the amendment to that section); Visoly v. Sec. Pacific Credit Corp., 625 So. 2d 1276, 1277 (Fl…
Authorities Cited
- Bitterman v. Anette Bitterman, 714 So. 2d 356 (Fla. 1998)