KENNETH WOLINER, M.D.
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
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.
A prevailing party's failure to serve notice on the Department of Financial Services as required by section 284.30, Florida Statutes, does not preclude the prevailing party from recovering costs, because costs and attorney's fees are distinct remedies.
[1] Costs and attorney's fees are distinct remedies, and a prevailing party's failure to comply with the statutory notice requirement for attorney's fees does not preclude re…
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“costs and attorney's fees are not one and the same”
Court's reasoning distinguishing costs from attorney's fees in the context of section 284.30 notice requirements
Kenneth N. Woliner, M.D., brought a public records violation action against the State of Florida Department of Health and Louise R. Wilhite-St. Lauren…
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 Prevailing Party Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
DAMOORGIAN, J.
Kenneth N. Woliner, M.D., the prevailing party below, appeals the final judgment and several interlocutory orders entered in his violation of public records action against the State of Florida Department of Health and Louise R. Wilhite-St. Laurent. Finding merit in the argument that the trial court erred in denying Appellant’s motion for costs based on his failure to comply with the notice requirement of section 284.30, Florida Statutes, we reverse and remand for the court to award Appellant his costs. See § 284.30, Fla. Stat. (2017) (“A party to a suit in any court, to be entitled to have his or her attorney’s fees paid by the state or any of its agencies, must serve a copy of the pleading claiming the fees on the Department of Financial Services . . . .” (emphasis added)); Johnson v. Jarvis, 107 So. 3d 428, 429–30 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (holding, albeit in the context of appellate costs, that the prevailing party’s failure to comply with the notice requirement of section 284.30 did not preclude the prevailing party from recovering costs, reasoning that “[c]osts and attorney’s fees are not one and the same”). We affirm on all other issues raised on appeal without further comment.
2
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. WARNER and MAY, JJ., concur.
* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.