BANKERS FIRE AND CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
JAMES B. NEWMAN ET AL., APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Declaratory Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Upon examination of the briefs and record on appeal and upon due consideration of oral argument we are of the opinion that the trial court erred in determining that the provisions of a surety bond issued by the plaintiff-appellant to secure payment of a promissory note created a contractual obligation to pay attorney’s fees in the event of default on the bond. See United Bonding Insurance Co. v. Inter National Bank of Miami, 221 So. 2d 20 (Fla.App.3d 1969). While the promissory note provides for the payment of attorney’s fees on default, the bond itself imposes no such obligation. Moreover, the suit below was neither a suit on the note nor a suit against the surety to enforce the provisions of the surety bond but, rather, was a suit for declaratory judgment filed by plaintiff to determine its rights and obligations under the subject bond which suit was dismissed by the plaintiff prior to any determination resulting in the appealed order taxing costs and awarding attorney’s fees. In all other respects the final judgment is affirmed.
AFFIRMED, in part; REVERSED, in part.
CROSS and MAGER, JJ., and TROW-BRIDGE, C. PFEIFFER, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Marshall v. W & L Enters. Corp., 360 So. 2d 1147 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)…efore, appellants claim, the attorney’s fees which they incurred in prosecuting the action against appellees were part of the “loss” against which they were protected by Reserve’s bond. Reserve, citing Bankers Fire Casualty Insurance Co. v. Newman, 330 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 3d D.C.A.1976) and previous cases, maintains that a surety is not obligated to pay attorney’s fees expended in prosecution of an action on the bond. It contends that even though the “Little FTC Act” grants the appellants the right to recover t…
-
Dealers Ins. Co., Inc. v. Centennial Cas. Co., 644 So. 2d 571 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…contains a provision authorizing recovery of fees against Krash, under Florida law a surety is not liable for attorney’s fees unless the bond itself contains a provision for recovery of attorney’s fees. Bankers Fire and Casualty Ins. Co. v. Newman, 330 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). This bond does not. It provides: NOW, THEREFORE, if the above named principal shall fully comply with the conditions of any written contract made by him as such dealer in connection with the sale or exchange of any motor vehicl…
-
AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Hubbel, 704 So. 2d 1141 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)…d the well-established principle that attorney fees are not considered part of a plaintiff’s damages, and thus cannot be recovered pursuant to a bond unless the bond itself provides for such recovery. See also Bankers Fire & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Newman, 330 So. 2d 760 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976) (provision of surety bond to secure payment of promissory note did not create a contractual obligation to pay attorney’s fees in the event of default); United Bonding Ins. Co. v. Inter National Bank, 221 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 3d DCA 19…
Authorities Cited
- United Bonding Ins. Co. v. Inter Nat'l Bank OF Miami, 221 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)