Bankers Multiple Line Ins. Co. v. Blanton, s. 76-2510 and 76-2533

Decision Date17 June 1977
Docket NumberNos. 76-2510 and 76-2533,s. 76-2510 and 76-2533
Citation352 So.2d 81
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals
PartiesBANKERS MULTIPLE LINE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. James C. BLANTON, as Administrator d. b. n. of the Estate of Donal Eugene Smith, Deceased, Meredith & Morse, Inc., a Florida Corporation, and Boyd McClure, Appellees. GARDEN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY and Bankers Multiple Line Insurance Company, Appellants, v. MEREDITH & MORSE, INC., and Boyd McClure, Appellees.

Joseph P. Metzger and John J. Hoy, Walton, Lantaff, Schroeder & Carson, West Palm Beach, for appellants.

Gary L. Vonhof, Johnson, Ackerman & Bakst, West Palm Beach, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

These are consolidated appeals by a defendant and a third party defendant involving motions for attorney's fees and costs.

The first question is whether the trial court was correct in ordering that the attorney's fees of defendants Meredith and Morse, Inc., and Boyd McClure, be paid by codefendant Bankers Multiple Line Insurance Company. The jury verdict was for the plaintiff, who had been injured, and whose husband had been killed, when a section of pipe rolled from a truck owned by Meredith and Morse and driven by McClure, their employee. Defendant Bankers was alleged to be the automobile liability insurer of Meredith and Morse, an allegation which Bankers denied. Meredith and Morse crossclaimed against Bakers for indemnity, and their crossclaim was dismissed, so that at the conclusion of the action there was no judgment against Bankers in favor of Meredith and Morse. 1

There is, of course, no common law right to payment of one's attorney's fees by another party, so that attorney's fees generally cannot be awarded by a court unless provided for by contract or statute. Rivera v. Deauville Hotel, Employers Service Corp., 277 So.2d 265 (Fla.1973). There was no contract in the present case, and the only allegedly applicable statute is Section 627.428(1), Florida Statutes (1975), which provides that:

Upon the rendition of a judgment or decree by any of the courts of this state against an insurer and in favor of an insured or the named beneficiary under a policy or contract executed by the insurer, the trial court, or, in the event of an appeal in which the insured or beneficiary prevails, the appellate court, shall adjudge or decree against the insurer and in favor of the insured or beneficiary a reasonable sum as fees or compensation for the insured's or beneficiary's attorney prosecuting the suit in which the recovery is had. (Emphasis supplied.)

There was no judgment or decree against Bankers in favor of Meredith and Morse, and so the trial court had no legal basis for its award of attorney's fees. We must reverse on this point.

The second consolidated appeal is by a third party defendant, Garden Construction Company, brought into the lawsuit by a third party complaint of Meredith and Morse and Boyd McClure. The third party complaint was voluntarily dismissed before the end of the trial. Garden moved for attorney's fees and costs. Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.420(d) is controlling:

Costs. Costs in any action dismissed under this rule shall...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • McKelvey v. Kismet, Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 19, 1983
    ...Paley v. Cocoa Masonry, Inc., 354 So.2d 945 (Fla.2d DCA), cert. denied, 359 So.2d 1212 (Fla.1978); Bankers Multiple Line Insurance Co. v. Blanton, 352 So.2d 81 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). As Rule 1.420(d) provides that costs must be assessed as soon as a dismissal is entered ("Costs ... shall be a......
  • Bay View Inn, Inc. v. Friedman, s. 87-2889
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • June 13, 1989
    ...Wiggins v. Wiggins, 446 So.2d 1078 (Fla.1984); MacBain v. Bowling, 374 So.2d 75, 76 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Bankers Multiple Line Ins. Co. v. Blanton, 352 So.2d 81 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). Rule 1.420(d) is therefore of no assistance to appellees with respect to the award of attorney's We do, howeve......
  • Horn v. Corkland Corp.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • January 6, 1988
    ...is within the discretion of the trial court. Martel v. Carlson, 118 So.2d 592 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960); Bankers Multiple Life Insurance Co. v. Blanton, 352 So.2d 81 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). On remand the court should determine whether both Scarborough and Corkland are accountable for the Horns' costs......
  • Simmons v. Schimmel
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • October 8, 1985
    ...they are not taxable costs under Rule 1.420(d), see Wiggins v. Wiggins, 446 So.2d 1078 (Fla.1984); Bankers Multiple Line Insurance Co. v. Blanton, 352 So.2d 81 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), and Gordon and its progeny are not applicable.4 This section provides in pertinent part:Each unit owner and ea......
  • 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