Altamonte Hitch and Trailer Service, Inc. v. U-Haul Co. of Eastern Florida, U-HAUL

Decision Date27 February 1986
Docket NumberU-HAUL,No. 85-1195,85-1195
Citation483 So.2d 852,11 Fla. L. Weekly 535
Parties11 Fla. L. Weekly 535 ALTAMONTE HITCH AND TRAILER SERVICE, INC., a Florida corporation and C.R. Foreman, Appellants, v.COMPANY OF EASTERN FLORIDA, a Florida corporation, and Amerco, Inc., a foreign corporation doing business in the State of Florida, Appellees.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

William L. Eagan of Arnold, Matheny & Eagan, P.A., Orlando, for appellants.

J. Thomas Cardwell and Chris N. Kolos of Akerman, Senterfitt & Eidson, Orlando, for appellees.

SHARP, Judge.

Following an appeal to this court, we remanded the proceeding to the trial court to award attorney's fees and costs on appeal. The trial court had reserved jurisdiction to award attorney's fees and costs for the trial phase. It then entered an award of $9,566.40 for costs and attorney's fees, but failed to distinguish what amounts were awarded for appellate or trial work.

Appellants filed a timely motion for review pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.400(c). 1 This court denied the relief requested on August 21, 1985, thereby apparently affirming the award. Appellants now seek review of the same order pursuant to Rule 9.130(a)(4) as a non-final order. 2 Appellees argue that appellants have no right to have this same order reviewed a second time on the merits. We disagree.

An order granting attorney's fees and costs after entry of a final judgment is a final appealable order. Clearwater Federal Savings and Loan Association v. Sampson, 336 So.2d 78 (Fla.1976); Hubert v. Div. of Admin., State of Florida D.O.T., 425 So.2d 671 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983); Saul v. Basse, 399 So.2d 130 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); State Department of Citrus v. Griffin, 332 So.2d 54 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976); Kucera v. Kucera, 330 So.2d 36 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975). They are not technically "non-final" orders, since all judicial labor regarding their entry has been completed. These awards pertain to attorney's fees incurred at the trial level following a final decree. They are sufficient to support a full appeal. In contrast, Rule 9.400(c) specifically provides the review method to be employed for attorney's fees awarded for appellate work when the appellate court makes an award but opts to have the trial court assess the amounts.

Here appellant pursued both remedies in a timely fashion by seeking review under both rules. Due to the nature of this court's organization, the motion was ruled on first. The appeal pertaining to attorney's fees for trial work has just now reached a different panel of judges for disposition.

The difficulty in this case, as well as in the case of the motion made pursuant to Rule 9.400, is that we can undertake no meaningful review of the sums awarded because the lower court failed to stipulate in its order what amounts awarded pertain to appellate fees and costs as opposed to trial fees and costs. Appellants are entitled to have these matters intelligently reviewed and this remedy should not be foreclosed to them because of the form of the order.

Accordingly, we remand this cause...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • Dependable Life Ins. Co. v. Harris
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • July 9, 1987
    ...court for apportionment of attorney's fees between the tort and contract awards. See Altamonte Hitch and Trailer Service, Inc. v. U-Haul Co. of Eastern Florida, 483 So.2d 852 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). Accordingly, we affirm the judgment in all regards, but we reverse the award of attorney's AFFI......
  • Kittel-Glass v. Oceans Four Condominium Ass'n
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • January 6, 1995
    ...amount of the award. See Casavan v. Land O'Lakes Realty, Inc., 526 So.2d 215 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988); Altamonte Hitch and Trailer Service, Inc. v. U-Haul Co., 483 So.2d 852 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986). ...
  • Pellar v. Granger Asphalt Paving, Inc., 96-1665
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • January 16, 1997
    ...the order in the lower tribunal. See Cline v. Gouge, 537 So.2d 625 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Altamonte Hitch and Trailer Service, Inc. v. U-Haul Company of Eastern Florida, 483 So.2d 852 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Starcher v. Starcher, 430 So.2d 991 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Failure to file a motion for re......
  • Utterback v. Starkey, 95-2440
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 28, 1996
    ...as those now before us. See Clearwater Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Sampson, 336 So.2d 78 (Fla.1976); Altamonte Hitch & Trailer Serv., Inc. v. U-Haul Co., 483 So.2d 852 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986).3 The law on this point turned out to be quite to the contrary of the view the writer so confidently expr......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT