TONY ROMERO, APPELLANT,
v.
CARLA ROMERO, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Vexatious Litigation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an assessment of attorney’s fees against an ex-husband for engaging in vexatious post-judgment litigation. We agree that such an award was justified by the circumstances. However, we substantially reduce the $96,443.75 actually assessed to $29,354.22, the accounts receivable balance as of June 9, 2006, because a great deal of the efforts expended in response by the former wife’s attorney were wholly unnecessary for which even a vexatious opponent should not have to pay. See Becker v. Becker, 778 So. 2d 438, 439 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Whitney v. Whitney, 638 So. 2d 517, 517-18 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Ziontz v. Ocean Trail Unit Owners Ass’n, 663 So. 2d 1334, 1335-37 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Miller v. First Am. Bank & Trust, 607 So. 2d 483 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Dalia v. Alvarez, 605 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Mettler v. Mettler, 569 So. 2d 496, 498 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ramos v. Begoña Lopez, 997 So. 2d 1119 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…ial court specifically finds that the former husband has engaged in vexatious, excessive, or unnecessary litigation, the court would be authorized to assess attorney’s fees and costs against the former husband for such actions. See Romero v. Romero, 971 So. 2d 863, 864 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (where former husband engaged in vexatious litigation attorney’s fees award justified). Reversed and remanded.…
Authorities Cited
- Miller v. First Am. Bank & Tr., 607 So. 2d 483 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)
- Mettler v. Mettler, 569 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
- Yanks v. Amerifirst Bank, 569 So. 2d 496 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)
- Murray Ziontz and Suzanne Ziontz v. Ocean Trail Unit Owners Ass'n, Inc., 663 So. 2d 1334 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
- Dalia v. Alvarez, 605 So. 2d 1282 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Becker v. Becker, 778 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Whitney v. Drue Leslye Whitney, 638 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)