JANET LEE MOYLE, APPELLANT,
v.
THE PARKLAND CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed attorney's fee award in condominium foreclosure dispute because trial court failed to make required findings on hourly rate, hours expended, and enhancement/reduction factors under Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe.
A trial court must make specific findings regarding hourly rate, hours reasonably expended, and appropriateness of enhancement or reduction factors when awarding attorney's fees, and failure to do so renders the fee award fundamentally erroneous.
[1] Trial court must make specific findings regarding hourly rate, hours reasonably expended, and appropriateness of enhancement or reduction factors when awarding attorney's…
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“the trial court did not specify exactly how much of the award was for attorney's fees, nor did it make the required Rowe findings.”
Court explaining why the fee award was deficient
Parkland Condominium Association sought to recover delinquent assessments, interest, attorney's fees, and costs from Janet Moyle, including surplus fu…
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 Condominium Assessments cases and more on FLexlaw
VILLANTI, Judge.
Janet Moyle appeals the trial court’s “Order for Delinquent Assessments, Interest, Attorney’s Fees and Costs.” She raises two issues — the trial court’s jurisdiction and the attorney’s fee award. As to the first issue, we affirm without comment. As to the second issue, we reverse the trial court’s order because it fails to set forth specific findings as to the hourly rate for attorney’s fees, the number of hours reasonably expended, and the appropriateness of reduction or enhancement factors as required by Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985). See Guardianship of Halpert v. Martin S. Rosenbloom, P.A., 698 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (noting that Roive findings are mandatory).
The trial court found that The Parkland Condominium Association, Inc., was entitled to recover attorney’s fees, costs, interest, and surplus funds from a foreclosure sale that had been disbursed to Moyle in the amount of $9,744.13.
However, the trial court did not specify exactly how much of the award was for attorney’s fees, nor did it make the required Rowe findings.
Therefore, the order is fundamentally erroneous on its face. Seé Baratta v. Valley Oak Homeowners’ Ass’n at the Vineyards, Inc., 891 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004).
We reverse the amount of fees awarded and remand with directions that the trial court make the findings required by Rowe to support an award of fees. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
DAVIS and SILBERMAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shep Harris, Jr. v. Zenoria T. McKINNEY, 20 So. 3d 400 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…ase law, the “fundamentally erroneous on its face" standard is applicable to all attorney's fees orders that lack Rowe findings. See Parton v. Palomino Lakes Prop. Owners Ass'n, 928 So. 2d 449, 453 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006); Moyle v. Parkland Condo. Ass’n, 898 So. 2d 259, 259 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); Bader v. Meros, Smith & Olney, P.A., 916 So. 2d 6, 6 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Guardianship of Halpert v. Martin S. Rosenbloom, P.A., 698 So. 2d 938, 939 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). . 1 acknowledge that in Boyle, 485 So. 2d at 879, this…
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Patient's Comp. Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985)
- Jami Robin Greenberg v. Greenberg, 698 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Baratta v. Valley OAK Homeowners' Ass'n AT THE Vineyards, Inc., 891 So. 2d 1063 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)