GLENN SMITH, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 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.
Glenn Smith appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to tax appellate costs following a successful appeal in which he established that his constitutional challenge to a Department of Corrections rule was properly stated and could be pursued in circuit court. The appellate court reversed, holding that because Smith prevailed on all significant issues in the prior appeal, he was entitled to tax his appellate costs.
The trial court erred in denying the motion to tax appellate costs. Because the appellant prevailed on all significant issues on appeal, he is entitled to tax his appellate costs.
[1] A party who prevails on all significant issues on appeal is entitled to taxation of appellate costs.
[2] A trial court's order denying a motion to tax appellate costs may be reversed and remanded for taxation of costs when the appellate court determines the movant prevailed…
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“Because the appellant prevailed on all of the significant issues on appeal, the order under review is reversed and this case is remanded to the trial court for taxation of appellate costs in favor of the appellant.”
The court's holding that cost taxation was proper because Smith succeeded on all significant issues in the prior appeal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSmith filed a complaint for declaratory relief challenging the constitutionality of a rule adopted by the Florida Department of Corrections. The trial…
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 Taxation Of Appellate Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.400(c), the appellant challenges an order by which the trial court, denied his motion to tax appellate costs following issuance of our mandate in Smith v. Florida Department of Corrections, 763 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). The trial court concluded that costs should not be taxed because the appellant had not prevailed on any significant issues on appeal and because the merits of his complaint had not been considered or adjudicated. We reverse the order under review and remand this case for taxation of appellate costs.
In his complaint for declaratory relief, the appellant challenged the constitutionality of a rule adopted by the appellee. Concluding that the appellant had failed to state a cause of action and had also failed to exhaust his available administrative remedies, the trial court denied the requested relief. On appeal, we determined that the complaint had sufficiently stated a cause of action and that the appellant was not required or permitted to seek administrative relief on his constitutional challenge. We accordingly observed in our opinion that the appellant had sufficiently stated a cause of action and that he was seeking an appropriate remedy in the circuit court. We cited Vaughn v. Department of Corrections, 754 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), which is authority for the proposition that the appellant lacked standing to raise his constitutional challenge in an administrative proceeding and was thus appropriately seeking relief in the circuit court.
Because the appellant prevailed on all of the significant issues on appeal, the order under review is reversed and this case is remanded to the trial court for taxation of appellate costs in favor of the appellant.
ALLEN, C.J., BENTON and POLSTON, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Osterback v. L.E. Turner, 855 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…n the merits of a claim, Newell v. Moore, 819 So. 2d 846 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002), and the merits of a claim need not be considered by the appellate court for a party to be eligible for an award of appellate costs, see Smith v. Department of Corrections, 797 So. 2d 1272 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). It is sufficient if the party prevails “on the significant issue in the appeal.” Newell, 819 So. 2d at 847. Here, the appellant prevailed on the sig- ■ nificant issue raised in his prior appeal to this court. Accordingly, the…
-
Smith v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 826 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…exhausted his administrative remedies. This issue was litigated in a prior appeal, and this court held in favor of Smith. See Smith v. Florida Dep’t of Corrections, 763 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); see also Smith v. Florida Dep’t of Corrections, 797 So. 2d 1272 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Under the law of the case doctrine, we reverse the decision of the circuit court and remand for further proceedings. ERVIN, WOLF and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Vaughn v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 754 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Dailey v. State, 763 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Smith v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 763 So. 2d 1264 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)