PHILLIP N. NORLAND, APPELLANT,
v.
VILLAGES AT COUNTRY CREEK MASTER ASSOCIATION, INC., JACK BLACKBURN, FRANK BINKA, ED EISELE, ROBERT SPURLOCK, WIMP MOYER, GEORGE FALBER, ROBERT SELBY, GENE HERSCH, AND BILL MARTIN, 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.
Norland appealed an award of attorney's fees following dismissal of his lawsuit against a homeowners' association for alleged violations of Florida's homeowners' association statute. The court affirmed the fee award for trial court proceedings but reversed the portion covering appellate proceedings, holding that the trial court lacked authority to award appellate fees without an appellate court order authorizing them.
The court affirmed the award of attorney's fees for proceedings before the trial court, as the appellees were the prevailing party following dismissal for failure to prosecute. However, the court reversed the portion of the fee award covering Norland's previous appeals, holding that the trial court lacked authority to award appellate attorney's fees absent an appellate court order authorizing such an award.
[1] The prevailing party in litigation concerning the duties of homeowners' associations under chapter 617, Florida Statutes, is entitled to recover attorney's fees.
[2] A defendant is the prevailing party for the purpose of awarding attorney's fees when the plaintiff's complaint is dismissed for failure to prosecute.
Previewing 2 of 3 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 appel-lees became the prevailing party when Norland's claim was dismissed for failure to prosecute.”
Establishes that dismissal for failure to prosecute makes the defendant the prevailing party entitled to attorney's fees under section 617.305(1).
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNorland sued Villages at Country Creek Master Association and its board members alleging violations of chapter 617, Florida Statutes, governing homeow…
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 Dismissal For Failure To Prosecute cases and more on FLexlaw
CANADY, Judge.
Phillip N. Norland appeals an award of attorney’s fees that followed the dismissal of his lawsuit against the appel-lees, Villages at Country Creek Master Association, Inc. (a homeowners’ association), and members of its board of directors. Norland’s complaint alleged a failure to comply with the provisions of chapter 617, Florida Statutes (1999), relating to the duties of homeowners’ associations. Section 617.305(1) provides that the prevailing party in such litigation is entitled to recover attorney’s fees. The appel-lees became the prevailing party when Norland’s claim was dismissed for failure to prosecute. See Stout Jewelers v. Corson, 639 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (holding that -defendant was prevailing party for purposes of awarding attorney’s fees when plaintiffs complaint was dismissed for failure to prosecute). Accordingly, we affirm the award of attorney’s fees pertaining to proceedings before the trial court.
However, we reverse the portion of the fee award pertaining to Norland’s previous appeals concerning the trial court’s dismissal of his suit. Since — as the appel-lees concede — neither this court nor the Florida Supreme Court issued an order awarding fees for Norland’s previous appeals, the trial court was without authority to award such fees. See Rados v. Rados, 791 So. 2d 1130, 1131 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (stating that ordinarily “[a] trial court cannot award appellate attorney’s fees unless the appellate court has authorized such an award”). We therefore direct the trial court to recalculate the attorney’s fee award without including fees for those appeals.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with instructions.
NORTHCUTT and STRINGER, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Baratta v. Valley OAK Homeowners' Ass'n AT THE Vineyards, Inc., 891 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…tion are entitled to recover attorney’s fees under section 720.305, Florida Statutes (2002). Valley Oak became the prevailing party when Ba-ratta’s claim was dismissed for failure to prosecute.2 See Norland v. Villages at Country Creek Master Ass’n, 851 So. 2d 770, 771 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (holding that a defendant homeowners’ association was the prevailing party for purposes of attorney’s fees when a plaintiff homeowner’s action was dismissed for failure to prosecute).3 Valley Oak, as the prevailing party, pr…
-
Stephen M. Zweibach, M.D. v. Richard Gordimer, C.P.A., & Rivero Gordimer & Co., P.A., 884 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…uring the appeal proceeding, a request that was denied by this court. We agree that it is improper for the trial court to award such fees when the appellate court has not authorized such an award. See Norland v. Vills. at Country Creek Master Ass’n, 851 So. 2d 770 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Accordingly, we reverse as to the amount awarded and direct the trial court to delete the amount attributed to appellate attorney’s fees from the award on remand. Zweibaeh raises several other challenges to the amount of the fee…
-
Narciso Vivot v. Bank OF Am., NA, 115 So. 3d 428 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)…sed for failure to give proper notice of intent to foreclose and that the defendant was entitled to a fee award based on the provisions of the note and mortgage even though the suit could be refiled); Norland v. Vills. at Country Creek Master Ass’n, 851 So. 2d 770, 771 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (“The appellees became the prevailing party when Norland’s claim was dismissed for failure to prosecute.”). Here, Vivot became the prevailing party when the foreclosure suit was dismissed for failure to prosecute. He gave no…
Authorities Cited
- Rados v. Rados, 791 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Feldman v. Am. Motors Sales Corp., 639 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)