THOMAS B. MURPHY AND MARIAN S. MURPHY, APPELLANTS,
v.
MICHAEL S. MURPHY AND JACQUELINE K. MURPHY, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed an award of attorney's fees under section 57.105 because the record did not support a finding that the losing party knew or should have known their claims lacked factual or legal support.
Attorney's fees under section 57.105 may not be awarded unless the record supports a finding that the losing party or its counsel knew or should have known the claim lacked material factual support or legal viability.
[1] Section 57.105 attorney's fees require a finding that the losing party or counsel knew or should have known the claim lacked material factual support or legal viability u…
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 intelligenceThomas and Marian Murphy appealed a final order awarding attorney's fees to Jacqueline Murphy in a dispute between family members.…
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 Attorney'S Fees Under Section 57.105 cases and more on FLexlaw
KELLY, Judge.
Thomas and Marian Murphy appeal the final order awarding Jacqueline Murphy attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2005). Section 57.105(1) provides for an award of attorney’s fees to the prevailing party in an action if the court finds that the losing party or the losing party’s attorney knew or should have known that a claim when initially presented “[w]as not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim” or “[w]ould not be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts.” Although “[t]he post-1999 version of section 57.105 has greatly expanded the court’s power to award fees when a party asserts a claim without an adequate factual foundation[,] ... the new statute is still intended to address frivolous pleadings.” Peyton v. Homer, 920 So. 2d 180, 183 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (citing Connelly v. Old Bridge Vill. Co-Op, Inc., 915 So. 2d 652, 656 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)). Because the record in this case does not support a finding that the Murphys or their counsel knew or should have known that their claims against Michael and Jacqueline Murphy were not supported by the material facts or the application of then-existing law to those material facts, see section 57.105(l)(a), (b), we reverse the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees under section 57.105.
Reversed.
CASANUEVA and CANADY, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Connelly v. OLD Bridge Vill. Co-Op, Inc., 915 So. 2d 652 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Peyton v. Horner, 920 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)