KEITH MILLER AND GRETCHEN MILLER, APPELLANTS,
v.
THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, ETC., 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 fees award in foreclosure because the award lacked required expert testimony on reasonableness of fees.
An award of attorney's fees in a foreclosure action must be supported by expert testimony establishing reasonableness, and testimony from only the lawyer claiming the fees is insufficient.
[1] An award of attorney's fees must be supported by independent expert testimony establishing reasonableness; testimony from the attorney claiming the fees alone is insuffic…
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“An award of attorney's fees must be supported by expert evidence.”
Court citing Diwakar v. Montecito Palm Beach Condo. Ass'n for the requirement of expert testimony.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKeith and Gretchen Miller were defendants in a foreclosure action brought by Bank of New York Mellon. The trial court awarded attorney's fees to the b…
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 Expert Testimony Requirement cases and more on FLexlaw
Keith and Gretchen Miller appeal a final judgment of foreclosure awarding attorney’s fees to the Bank of New York Mellon. We reverse because the attorney’s fees award was not supported by expert testimony. See Diwakar v. Montecito Palm Beach Condo. Ass’n, 143 So.3d 958, *1199960 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (“An award of attorney’s fees must be supported by expert evidence.”) (citation omitted). Testimony from only the lawyer claiming the fees is “clearly inadequate.” Mullane v. Lorenz, 372 So.2d 168, 168 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979). Although “[w]e have ... previously questioned the judicially-created requirement of independent expert witness testimony in establishing the reasonableness of attorney’s fees,” “it remains etched in our case law.” Robin Roshkind, P.A. v. Machiela, 45 So.3d 480, 481 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). See also Sea World of Fla., Inc. v. Ace Am. Ins. Cos., 28 So.3d 158, 160 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010); Palmetto Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n v. Day, 512 So.2d 332 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Accordingly, we reverse the attorney’s fees award and remand for a further hearing. See Mullane, 372 So.2d at 168; Palmetto, 512 So.3d at 332-33. We affirm the other issues raised without discussion.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
GERBER, LEVINE and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Diwakar v. Montecito Palm Beach Condo. Ass'n, Inc., 143 So. 3d 958 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
- Robin Roshkind, P.A. v. MacHiela, 45 So. 3d 480 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)
- SEA World OF Fla., Inc. v. ACE Am. Ins. Cos., Inc., 28 So. 3d 158 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)
- Mullane v. Twylah M. Lorenz, 372 So. 2d 168 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)
- Williams v. Zungi Builders, Inc., 512 So. 2d 332 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)