Rakusin v. CHRISTIANSEN & JACKNIN, PA
| Decision Date | 31 December 2003 |
| Docket Number | No. 4D03-1609., No. 4D03-26 |
| Parties | Stephen RAKUSIN, Appellant, v. CHRISTIANSEN & JACKNIN, P.A., Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Stephen Rakusin of Stephen Rakusin, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, pro se.
Neil B. Jagolinzer of Christiansen & Jacknin, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Stephen Rakusin ("Rakusin") appeals the final order awarding Christiansen and Jacknin, P.A., attorney's fees and costs based upon the court's inherent authority to assess attorney's fees in cases involving bad faith litigation. See Patsy v. Patsy, 666 So.2d 1045, 1047 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)
. While we agree that the court had the authority to assess fees in the circumstances of this case, the court erred in making the award absent expert witness testimony as to the reasonableness of the fees, and in failing to determine the reasonable hourly rate and reasonable number of hours attributable to the bad faith activity. We therefore reverse.1
Appellee Christiansen and Jacknin, P.A., was discharged from representation of Elizabeth Heller ("Heller") in her dissolution of marriage proceeding. Heller never paid the bill for services rendered, and Christiansen and Jacknin filed a notice of charging lien. Appellant Rakusin substituted as counsel for Heller in the proceedings, and a final judgment was entered in March 2001.
Subsequent to the entry of the final judgment, Christiansen and Jacknin moved to adjudicate its charging lien. From the point that the motion was filed, it appears that Rakusin attempted to do everything he could to delay the proceedings, including, on several occasions, agreeing to the setting of depositions only to call the day before and cancel or refuse to appear. He also failed to provide documents demanded in discovery, even after agreeing to do so, in order to avoid scheduled hearings on motions to compel. Christiansen and Jacknin filed a motion for sanctions against Rakusin. Finally, Heller agreed to the amount for the claim of lien, and the court approved a settlement reserving jurisdiction to consider the sanction motion against appellant.
At the hearing, attorney Christiansen testified to the attempts Christiansen and Jacknin made to settle the case and the delaying tactics employed by Rakusin to prevent the matter from concluding. He admitted a summary of his fees and costs into evidence and testified that in his opinion the fees and costs were reasonable in Palm Beach County for the services provided. He did not present any expert testimony as to the reasonableness of the fees.
Ultimately the court granted the motion for sanctions, finding that Rakusin had engaged in bad faith litigation, and awarded attorney's fees to Christiansen and Jacknin. Starting with the amount billed by Christiansen and Jacknin, the court concluded that the charging lien matter could have been resolved in half the time actually incurred had it not been for Rakusin's antics. Therefore, the court ordered Rakusin to pay half the bill, $6,414.32. It is from this order Rakusin appeals.
Id. (citations omitted). Although we noted in Island Hoppers, Ltd. v. Keith, 820 So.2d 967 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002), that Florida courts have demanded the testimony of a corroborating expert as to the reasonableness of fees, we questioned the advisability of this requirement in every case, noting that "our trial judges have become highly experienced in all aspects of litigation, often with knowledge equal to, or in some cases far superior to, that of those attorneys who are called upon to provide expert testimony as a `fees witness.'" Id. at 972....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Schafler v. Fairway Park Condominium Ass'n
...v. Griffin, 783 So.2d 363 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 2001); Levine v. Keaster, 862 So.2d 876 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2003); Rakusin v. Christiansen & Jacknin, 863 So.2d 442 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2003); and, Brake v. Murphy, 736 So.2d 745 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1999). In light of the parties' inability to address the ......
-
Mitchell v. Flatt
... ... expended and the reasonableness of the hourly fee." ... Rakusin v. Christiansen & Jacknin, P.A ., 863 ... So.2d 442, 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); see also ... ...
-
Mitchell v. Flatt
...as to the reasonableness of the amount of time expended and the reasonableness of the hourly fee." Rakusin v. Christiansen & Jacknin, P.A ., 863 So. 2d 442, 444 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) ; see also Crittenden Orange Blossom Fruit v. Stone , 514 So. 2d 351, 352–53 (Fla. 1987) ("[I]t is well settle......
-
Hicks v. Hicks
..., 94 So. 3d at 707. The same rule applies with respect to an award of attorney's fees as a sanction. Rakusin v. Christiansen & Jacknin, P.A. , 863 So. 2d 442, 445 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). The sister also concedes error in the trial court's failure to include the lodestar. Finally, reversal is a......
-
Attorneys' fees and costs
...of wife’s physician, which fees were incurred as a result of husband’s discovery demands. • Rakusin v. Christiansen & Jacknin, P.A., 863 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). Requirement that there must be corroborating testimony regarding reasonableness of fees applies when fee award is made as ......
-
Final judgment; rehearing; motions related to judgment
...entitlement to fees, particularly where wife was in financially superior position to husband. • Rakusin v. Christiansen & Jacknin, P.A., 863 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). Requirement that there must be corroborating testimony regarding reasonableness of fees applies when fee award is made......
-
Family law proceedings and grounds
...directly relate to those incurred as a result of the specific bad faith conduct of the lawyer. • Rakusin v. Christiansen & Jacknin, P.A., 863 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). Fourth DCA holding that there must be corroborating testimony regarding reasonableness of fees applies when fee award......
-
Pleadings and mandatory electronic filing
...directly relate to those incurred as a result of the specific bad faith conduct of the lawyer. • Rakusin v. Christiansen & Jacknin, P.A., 863 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). Requirement that there must be corroborating testimony regarding reasonableness of fees applies when the fee award is......