[Download] "Giltex Corporation v. Raymond Diehl" by First District Court of Appeal of Florida * eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free

📘 Read Now     📥 Download

eBook details

• Title: Giltex Corporation v. Raymond Diehl
• Author : First District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Release Date : January 23, 1991
• Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
• Pages : * pages
• Size : 65 KB

Description

Appellant, Giltex Corporation, was previously successful in demonstrating its entitlement to an attorney's fee as the prevailing
party in a contract dispute involving the sale and purchase of real estate.1{/Cite} Upon remand, the trial court awarded
a fee of $6500--$4,500 for services rendered in the trial court and $2,000 for services rendered in the appeal. However, the
trial court's order fails to set forth specific findings as to the hourly rate, the number of hours reasonably expended, and
the appropriateness of the reduction or enhancement factors, contrary to Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472
So.2d 1145, 1151 (Fla. 1985). We reverse. On appeal, appellee, Raymond Diehl, Jr., contends this court should not reach the question of the applicability of Rowe,
because there is no transcript of the attorney's fee hearing below and the lack of a transcript constitutes an insufficient
record which precludes appellate review. Clayton v. Clayton, 442 So.2d 310 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (decision of trial court has
the presumption of correctness and appellant has burden to demonstrate error--lack of a trial transcript or a proper substitute
is a fatal flaw in appellant's case). Next, Diehl contends that Rowe does not apply to a contract dispute like the one involved
in this case. Stabinski, Funt & De Oliveira, P.A. v. Alvarez, 490 So.2d 159 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). Finally, Diehl contends
that Giltex's acceptance of a cashier's check for $6500, subsequent to filing its notice of appeal, constitutes an acceptance
of the benefits of the trial court's final order and Giltex is estopped to seek reversal of that order on appeal. McMullen
v. Fort Pierce Financing & Construction Co., 108 Fla. 492, 146 So. 567 (Fla. 1933). We reject each of appellee's arguments.

Books Free Download "Giltex Corporation v. Raymond Diehl" PDF ePub Kindle