TRIPP CONSTRUCTION, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
CHARLES VERDE, FREDESYNIA VERDE, SILVANO RAMOS PATLAN, JUAN OCAMPO AND ADIA OCAMPO, APPELLEES

Fla. 3d DCA | 2001-07-11
No. 3D00-867
Before GODERICH and SORONDO, JJ., and NESBITT, Senior Judge.
789 So. 2d 1171 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2001) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

Tripp Construction appeals a trial court's award of attorney's fees totaling $675,612.50 (with a 2.5 multiplier) assessed under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.380(c) for failing to admit facts in a class action construction defect case. The court affirmed the homeowners' entitlement to attorney's fees but reversed and remanded the case to determine the proper amount based on time spent proving the denied facts.


Holding

The homeowners are entitled to attorney's fees under Rule 1.380(c) for Tripp's failure to admit the requested facts. However, the trial court's award of $675,612.50 (with a 2.5 multiplier) exceeds the parameters of Rule 1.380(c) and must be recalculated based on reasonable expenses, including only reasonable attorney's fees for time spent proving the facts Tripp failed to admit.


Headnotes

[1] A party may recover reasonable expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred in proving facts that the opposing party unjustifiably failed to admit in response to a reque…

[2] The failure to admit the truth of a matter in a request for admissions must be unjustified to warrant an award of attorney's fees and costs.

Previewing 2 of 5 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

Key Quotes

“the requesting party may apply to the court for an order requiring the other party to pay the requesting party the reasonable expenses incurred in making that proof, which may include attorneys' fees”

Establishes the basis for attorney's fee awards under Rule 1.380(c) - limited to reasonable expenses in proving denied facts

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Tripp Construction built homes in Villages of Palm Bay, Homestead, Florida. Homeowners filed a class action suit in April 1996 alleging the homes viol…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Tripp Construction, Inc. (Tripp), appeals the trial court’s order awarding attorney’s fees.

The order under review stems from a class action construction defect case commenced on April 24, 1996, by representative plaintiffs, Charles Verde, Fredesynia Verde, Silvano Ramos Patlan, Juan Ocam-po and Adia Ocampo (collectively, homeowners). The homeowners sued Tripp, the builder of Villages of Palm Bay in Homestead, Florida, and Southwin, Inc. (South-win), the developer and seller of the homes, for violation of minimum building codes under section 558.84, Florida Statutes, and for breach of contract, respectively.

At the outset of the litigation, the homeowners served requests for admissions, which asked that Tripp and Southwin admit:

That prior to the construction of the subject homes, the defendants failed to have approved by Florida City, Plans for the construction of the said homes as required by the South Florida Building Code.

That when sold, the subject homes were constructed in violation of the South Florida Building Code.

In June 1996, Tripp and Southwin denied the requests for admissions. Moreover, at the hearing on the motion for class certification, Tripp presented evidence and argument denying the subject of the requested admissions.

The case proceeded to a jury trial in June 1999, during which the homeowners presented uncontroverted evidence that the houses were in violation of the code and built without approved plans. After a jury verdict finding that the homes violated the building code, the trial court entered a final judgment in favor of the homeowners for $5,237,893.00, and reserved jurisdiction to award attorney’s fees and costs.

The homeowners filed a motion for attorney’s fees. After a hearing on the motion, the trial court ordered Tripp to pay all of the homeowners’ attorney’s fees from the time Tripp denied the request for admissions,1 based on rule 1.380(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.2

While we affirm the homeowners’ entitlement to attorney’s fees, we reverse the amount of the award because we find it exceeds the parameters of rule 1.380(c). Accordingly, we remand the matter to the trial court for a hearing to determine the amount of time expended by counsel to prove the facts that Tripp failed to admit in the request for admissions. Affirmed in part; reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.

. The award of attorney's fees against Tripp amounted to $675,612.50 (calculated by applying a 2.5 multiplier).

. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.380(c) provides:

Expenses on Failure to Admit. If a party fails to admit the ... truth of any matter as requested under Rule 1.370 and if the party requesting the admissions thereafter proves ... the truth of the matter, the requesting party may apply to the court for an order requiring the other party to pay the requesting party the reasonable expenses incurred in making that proof, which may include attorneys’ fees. The court shall make the order unless if finds that (1) the request was held objectionable pursuant to rule 1.370(a), (2) the admission sought was of no substantial importance, or (3) there was other good reason for the failure to admit.

(Emphasis added).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Hahamovitch v. Hahamovitch, 133 So. 3d 1020 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
    …n the central issue in the case). However, entitlement to fees under rule 1.380(c) has been affirmed where the requesting party presented uncontroverted evidence establishing the truth of the requests for admissions. See Tripp Const., Inc. v. Verde, 789 So. 2d 1171, 1172 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). Without delving into the minutiae of the discovery requests, we conclude that the requests for admission pertained to contested matters that were central issues in the case. Therefore, we reverse the award of fees and cost…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw