PHILIP L. RAIA, APPELLANT,
v.
JOYCE C. RAIA, APPELLEE
PHILIP L. RAIA, APPELLANT,
JOYCE C. RAIA, APPELLEE
866 So. 2d 198
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2004)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 8 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We find no error in the trial court’s Final Order on appeal. On cross-appeal, however, we reverse in part the Final Judgment rendered May 6, 2003, and remand to the trial court to award statutory interest on Former Husband’s attorney’s fee obligation of $14,264.00 to accrue from March 7, 2003. See Fischbach & Moore, Inc. v. McBro, 619 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). The remaining issue on cross-appeal is without merit.
AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
BOOTH, VAN NORTWICK and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wilkinson v. McDONOUGH, 960 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…ner must reply. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.300(b) (providing that, “[except as prescribed by subdivision (d) of this rule, service of a motion shall toll the time schedule of any proceeding in the court until disposition of the motion”); Forbes v. Crosby, 866 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (quashing denial of a petition for a writ of mandamus entered without affording petitioner time to reply to the Department’s response). Accordingly, we grant the petition for a writ of certiorari; quash the trial court’s order; a…
-
Bango v. Crosby, 921 So. 2d 779 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…rcuit court entered its order without affording petitioner time to file his reply to the Department’s response, we quash the order of the circuit court. This case is hereby remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings. See Forbes v. Crosby, 866 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). In light of this disposition, we decline to address the correctness of the circuit court’s decision at this time. PETITION GRANTED; ORDER QUASHED; REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. ERVIN, WOLF and BROWNING, JJ., concur.…
-
United Auto. Ins. Co. v. Miami Med. Grp., Inc., 935 So. 2d 41 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…based on section 57.105, Florida Statutes. Instead, we treat Miami Medical Group’s response as a confession of error because it acknowledges that the order awarding fees is not supported under section 57.105, Florida Statutes. See Forbes v. Crosby, 866 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). We thus grant the petition, issue a writ of certiorari quashing the order awarding Miami Medical Group appellate attorney’s fees for litigating the appropriateness of a fee multiplier or as a sanction, and remand the matter to t…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fischbach & Moore, Inc. v. McBRO, 619 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)