STEPHANIE SACKETT
v.
DAVID TUBERO AND PAULA TUBERO

Fla. 4th DCA | 2025-07-09
No. 2024-2565
Goodman, J., Warner, J., Gross, J., Conner, J.
2025 FL 5811 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2025)

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.


Holding

Attorney's fees under section 83.48, Florida Statutes, are available only when a judgment or decree has been rendered following a final adjudication on the merits, not upon a voluntary dismissal without prejudice.


Headnotes

[1] Under section 83.48, Florida Statutes, attorney's fees are recoverable only when a judgment or decree has been rendered following a final adjudication on the merits, and…

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

Key Quotes

“a voluntary dismissal without prejudice is not an adjudication of the merits”

Aquino v. Choy, 367 So. 3d 538, 538–39 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023), cited for the proposition that section 83.48 does not provide attorney's fees upon voluntary dismissal

Facts & Procedural History

Stephanie Sackett appealed a trial court decision in a case against David Tubero and Paula Tubero. The case involved a dispute regarding entitlement t…

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.


Opinion of the Court
Conner

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

STEPHANIE SACKETT, Appellant,

v.

DAVID TUBERO and PAULA TUBERO, Appellees.

No. 4D2024-2565

[July 9, 2025]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Jaimie R. Goodman, Judge; L.T. Case No. 2022CA008018.

Lisa M. Boswell of Lisa M. Boswell, P.A. Wellington, for appellant.

No appearance for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Ortuzar v. Foley, 339 So. 3d 456, 458 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022) (holding that the reference in section 83.48, Florida Statutes (2022), to a “judgment” requires a “final adjudication of the merits of an action” to trigger entitlement to attorney’s fees); Aquino v. Choy, 367 So. 3d 538, 538– 39 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023) (affirming the denial of an award of prevailing party attorney’s fees based upon section 83.48, because the statute “does not provide that attorney’s fees will inure to the prevailing party; it provides that a party in whose favor a judgment or decree has been rendered may recover fees from the nonprevailing party . . . [a]nd a voluntary dismissal without prejudice is not an adjudication of the merits”); Kovic v. Kovic, 336 So. 3d 22, 25 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022) (holding that an argument raised for the first time in the motion for rehearing in the trial court “is not preserved for appeal”).

WARNER, GROSS and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw