From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Barron Chase Sec. v. Moser

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Jun 8, 2001
794 So. 2d 649 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Summary

involving arbitration award against securities dealer pursuant to § 517.211, Fla. Stat.

Summary of this case from Wight v. Wight

Opinion

No. 2D98-4009.

Opinion filed June 8, 2001.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pasco County; Catherine M. Harlan, Judge.

Karol K. Williams and Allison M. Perry of Karol K. Williams, P.A., Tampa, for Appellant.

Richard R. Logsdon, Clearwater, and Allan J. Fedor, Largo, for Appellee.


ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA


This case is before us on remand from the Supreme Court of Florida. Moser v. Barron Chase Sec., Inc., 783 So.2d 231 (Fla. 2001).

The supreme court quashed our earlier decision and remanded this case for further proceedings based on its finding that the trial court correctly interpreted language in the arbitration award as indicating that Moser prevailed on her statutory claim and therefore is entitled to attorney's fees in this case. However, Moser's fee award must be reconsidered by the trial court.

The trial court granted interest on Moser's fee award retroactive to the date of the arbitration award. Interest on an attorney's fee award begins to accrue from the date entitlement to the fee is determined. Quality Engineered Installation, Inc., v. Higley S., Inc., 670 So.2d 929 (Fla. 1996). Absent an agreement between the parties, the circuit court, and not the arbitration panel, has jurisdiction to determine entitlement to attorney's fees. Therefore the court erred in finding that Moser's entitlement to fees was determined as of the date of the arbitration award. Turnberry Assoc. v. Serv. Station Aid, Inc., 651 So.2d 1173 (Fla. 1995).

Also, the trial court erred in awarding Moser attorney's fees incurred in litigating the amount of fees. Attorney's fees may be awarded for litigating the issue of entitlement to fees but not for time expended litigating the amount of fees. State Farm Fire Cas. Co. v. Palma, 629 So.2d 830 (Fla. 1993); Nat'l Portland Cement Co. v. Goudie, 718 So.2d 274 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).

Accordingly, we affirm the confirmation of the arbitrator's decision and the determination as to entitlement to attorney's fees. However, on remand, the court should enter an order indicating that Moser is entitled to a fee award with interest accruing from the date of the trial court's original order awarding attorney's fees. The new fee award should not include fees generated while litigating the amount of fees.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded for the determination of a fee award consistent with this opinion.

PARKER, A.C.J., and CASANUEVA, J., Concur.


Summaries of

Barron Chase Sec. v. Moser

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Jun 8, 2001
794 So. 2d 649 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

involving arbitration award against securities dealer pursuant to § 517.211, Fla. Stat.

Summary of this case from Wight v. Wight
Case details for

Barron Chase Sec. v. Moser

Case Details

Full title:BARRON CHASE SECURITIES, INC., Appellant, v. KATHRYN B. MOSER…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Jun 8, 2001

Citations

794 So. 2d 649 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Citing Cases

Wight v. Wight

We have denied fees for litigating the amount of fees in a number of different contexts. See, e.g., Fleet…

Paladyne Corp. v. Weindruch

In fact, all appellate courts but the First District appear to agree that fees are not awardable for…