PHILENE HARTE-WEINER-TOLEDO
v.
DANIEL F. TOLEDO, JR., ETC.
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 brief per curiam affirmance in a family law matter involving Philene Harte-Weiner-Toledo and Daniel F. Toledo, Jr., affirming the lower court's decision while clarifying standards for attorney's fees awards under Florida law.
The lower court's decision is affirmed. The court reaffirms that clear and convincing evidence requires evidence that is precise, explicit, and produces a firm belief without hesitation, and that merely succeeding on a motion to dismiss or summary judgment is insufficient to warrant an attorney's fees award under section 57.105.
[1] An award of attorney's fees under Florida Statute section 57.105 requires more than the moving party's success in obtaining a dismissal or summary judgment; the claim mus…
[2] Failing to state a cause of action is not, in itself, a sufficient basis to support an award of attorney's fees under section 57.105.
Previewing 2 of 2 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“Clear and convincing evidence is defined as evidence 'that is precise, explicit, lacking in confusion, and of such weight that it produces a firm belief or conviction, without hesitation, about the matter in issue.'”
Establishes the applicable evidentiary standard for clear and convincing evidence in this matter.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe opinion does not provide detailed factual background, as it is a short per curiam affirmance citing to established legal standards.…
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 Sanctions For Frivolous Claims cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed May 29, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-0810 Lower Tribunal No. 20-396
________________
Philene Harte-Weiner-Toledo,
Appellant,
vs.
Daniel F. Toledo, Jr., etc., Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Victoria del Pino, Judge. Mandel Law Group, P.A., and Roberta G. Mandel, for appellant. Law Offices of Geoffrey B. Marks, and Geoffrey B. Marks, for appellee. Before EMAS, GORDO and BOKOR JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Larkins v. Mendez, 363 So. 3d 140, 146 n.5 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“Clear and convincing evidence is defined as evidence ‘that is precise, explicit, lacking in confusion, and of such weight that it produces a firm belief or conviction, without hesitation, about the matter in issue.’” (citation omitted)); see also Soto v. Carrollwood Vill. Phase III Homeowners Ass'n, Inc., 326 So. 3d 1181, 1184 (Fla. 2d DCA 2021) (“Failing to state a cause of action is not, in and of itself, a sufficient basis to support a finding that a claim was so lacking in merit as to justify an award of fees pursuant to section 57.105.” (quotation omitted)); see also MC Liberty Express, Inc. v. All Points Servs., Inc., 252 So. 3d 397, 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (“[A]n award of fees under section 57.105 requires more than the moving party succeeding in obtaining a dismissal of the action or the entry of a summary judgment in its favor . . . .”).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Philene Harte-Weiner-Toledo v. Toledo, 363 So. 3d 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Larkins v. Mendez, 363 So. 3d 140, 146 n.5 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023) (“Clear and convincing evidence is defined as evidence ‘that is precise, explicit, lacking in confusion, and of such weight that it produces a firm belief or conviction, without hesitation, about the matter in issue.’” (c…
-
Loumpos v. Bank One (Fla. 2025)
-
Valente v. Raissi, 343 So. 3d 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022)
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fernandez v. State, 252 So. 3d 397 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
- Philene Harte-Weiner-Toledo v. Toledo, 363 So. 3d 140 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)