JONATHAN R. ZACHEM, APPELLANT,
v.
PARADIGM PROPERTIES MANAGEMENT TEAM, INC., 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 trial court properly determined that appellee's nominal offer of judgment was made in good faith and did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney's fees against appellant, where appellee obtained summary judgment of no liability based on a reasonable belief that exposure to liability was minimal.
A nominal offer of judgment may be made in good faith when the offeror has a reasonable basis to believe that exposure to liability is minimal, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in awarding attorney's fees.
[1] A nominal offer of judgment may be made in good faith when the offeror has a reasonable basis to believe that exposure to liability is minimal, even if the offer is for a…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“A nominal offer is appropriate where the offeror has a reasonable basis to believe that exposure to liability is minimal.”
The court explaining the standard for determining whether a nominal offer is made in good faith.
Appellee made a nominal offer of judgment in a case where it ultimately obtained summary judgment of no liability. Appellant challenged the offer as m…
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 Offer Of Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial court committed no abuse of discretion in determining that appellee’s offer of judgment was not made in bad faith and, after making such a determination, allowing attorney’s fees against appellant. Here, appellee obtained a summary judgment of no liability, which has now been affirmed by this court.* Zachem v. Paradigm Props. Mgmt. Team, Inc., 861 So. 2d 1160 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (table). A nominal offer is appropriate where the offeror has-a reasonable basis to believe that exposure to liability is minimal. See, e.g., Dean v. Vazquez, 786 So. 2d 637, 640 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (“[A]s confirmed by the jury verdict the Defendants had a reasonable basis to conclude their exposure was nominal.”); Deltona House Rentals, Inc. v. Cloer, 734 So. 2d 586,-588 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (“In. light of the manifest lack of liability, [appellant] was not obliged to offer more than a nominal amount for its offer to be in good faith.”); City of Neptune Beach v. Smith, 740 So. 2d 25, 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (acknowledging, the “widely accepted view that even a nominal offer may be made in good faith”).
AFFIRMED.
BARFIELD, KAHN and HAWKES, JJ., concur. *
Although not dispositive, the ultimate outcome of the proceedings is certainly a consideration in determining whether an offer was made in good faith. See McMahan v. Toto, 311 F. 3d 1077, 1084-85 (11th Cir.2002) (finding the argument that the offeror lacked a reasonable belief that it would prevail to be "illogical’' and "unreasonable,” in light of the fact that the offeror prevailed on summary judgment).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Taylor Eng'g v. Dickerson Fla., Inc., 221 So. 3d 719 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)…an award of costs and attorney’s fees. § 768.79(1) & (7)(a), Fla. Stat.1 In determining whether a nominal offer was made in good faith, we have previously applied the standard articulated in Arrowood. See Zachem v. Paradigm Prop. Mgmt. Team, Inc., 867 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (“A nominal offer is appropriate where the offeror has a reasonable basis to believe that exposure to liability is minimal.”). See also Connell v. Floyd, 866 So. 2d 90, 94 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (Benton, J., dissenting) (stating tha…
-
Zachem v. Paradigm Props. Mgmt. Team, Inc., 867 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
-
Arrowood Indem. Co. v. Acosta, Inc., 58 So. 3d 286 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…999). In the context of a nominal offer of judgment, this court has held that where the offeror has a reasonable basis to believe that exposure to liability is minimal, a nominal offer is appropriate. Zachem v. Paradigm Properties Mgmt. Team, Inc., 867 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); City of Neptune Beach, 740 So. 2d at 27 (“[T]he obligation of good faith merely insists that the offeror have some reasonable foundation upon which to base an offer.” (quoting Schmidt, 629 So. 2d at 1039)). But see Sharaby v. KL…
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
- McMAHAN v. Toto, 311 F.3d 1077 (11th Cir. 2002)
- Deltona House Rentals, Inc. v. Cloer, 734 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)
- City OF Neptune Beach v. Smith, 740 So. 2d 25 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Zachem v. Paradigm Props. Mgmt. Team, Inc., 867 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
- Raynard Wilder v. State, 786 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Dean v. Vazquez, 786 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)