GAEDEKE HOLDINGS v. MORTGAGE CONSULTANTS

Decision Date07 July 2004
Docket NumberNo. 4D03-3894.,4D03-3894.
Citation877 So.2d 824
PartiesGAEDEKE HOLDINGS, LTD., a Texas limited partnership by and through its general partner, Gaedeke Investments, Inc., a Texas corporation authorized to transact business in the State of Florida and transacting business in the State of Florida, Appellant, v. MORTGAGE CONSULTANTS, INC., a Georgia corporation doing business without authority in the State of Florida, Randy Nier, and Scott Olinick, Appellees.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Debra Mann Cohen of Mandel, Weisman, Heimberg, Brodie & Griffin, P.A., Boca Raton, for appellant.

Jerald A. Goldstein, Boca Raton, for appellees.

POLEN, J.

Appellant, Gaedeke Holdings, Ltd., has timely appealed an order denying its motion for attorneys' fees and costs. For the following reasons, we reverse in part and remand with instructions for the trial court to enter an order consistent with this opinion.

This appeal arose from a breach of a lease and guaranty suit by Gaedeke against Mortgage Consultants, Inc. in May of 1999. An Agreed Final Judgment was entered in January of 2000 against Mortgage Consultants for $25,733.69. After Gaedeke attempted to execute on the judgment and discovered that Mortgage Consultants was insolvent, Appellees Nier and Olinick were impled for alleged fraudulent transfers. On March 6, 2003, prior to the trial against Nier and Olinick, Gaedeke filed a motion for attorneys' fees and costs against Mortgage Consultants. A hearing was held on this motion on May 29, 2003. Nier's counsel submitted a memorandum of law and Olinick's counsel failed to appear whatsoever. On May 29, 2003, the trial court entered a Final Judgment and Order on Plaintiff's Motion for Taxation of Costs and Attorney's Fees awarding Gaedeke $43,208.52 for costs and fees against Mortgage Consultants. Gaedeke was also granted leave to amend its pleadings upon proof of fraudulent transfers.

Prior to the trial against Nier and Olinick, requests for admission were served. Olinick denied all of the requests for admission. At the trial, the trial court held that there were fraudulent transfers. A final judgment was entered against Nier and Olinick on August 22, 2003. Gaedeke then sought to recover attorneys' fees and costs under section 56.29(11), Florida Statutes, from Nier and Olinick based on the collection of the judgment against Mortgage Consultants. The trial court requested memorandums of law on the issue. On September 24, 2003, the trial court denied Gaedeke's Motion for Costs and Fees against Nier and Olinick, specifically finding:

Under Florida law, the Plaintiff is not entitled to an award of attorneys' fees in any supplemental proceedings against either Randy Nier or Scott Olinick. This includes the $40,643.52 sought in the Plaintiff's March 6, 2003 Motion on Taxation of Costs and Attorney Fees, ... See § 56.29 Fla. Stat. (2003); Dusoe v. Securis International, 672 So.2d 89 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Rosenfeld v. TPI International Airways, 630 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Bonizo Properties v. Schroeder, 528 So.2d 1304 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988).

Gaedeke first challenges the trial court's ruling that, as a matter of law, Gaedeke is not permitted to recover attorneys' fees and costs for supplemental proceedings against Nier and Olinick. We find no error in this ruling. Gaedeke moved for fees and costs against the impled defendants under section 56.29(11), which provides:

Costs for proceedings supplementary shall be taxed against the defendant as well as all other incidental costs determined to be reasonable and just by the court including, but not limited to, docketing the execution, sheriff's service fees, and court reporter's fees. Reasonable attorney's fees may be taxed against the defendant.

Rosenfeld v. TPI Int'l. Airways, 630 So.2d 1167, 1169 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), is controlling on this issue.

[W]e believe an analysis of chapter 56 demonstrates that attorney's fees, if awarded, are to be assessed against the judgment debtor. Supplementary proceedings under the statute are proceedings subsequent to judgment to aid a judgment creditor in collecting his judgment against the judgment debtor. Section 56.29, providing for impleading additional parties, contains no authority for assessing fees against the implied third party defendant. The statute authorizes fees against "the defendant." Throughout the statute, use of the term "the defendant" clearly references the judgment debtor. Thus, under rules of statutory construction, we fail to find authority for allowing attorney's fees otherwise than against the judgment debtor.

Id.; see also Speer v. Mason, 769 So.2d 1102, 1105 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000) (holding Florida law does not allow for award of prevailing attorney's fees against individual, who was made party to appeal through supplementary proceedings); Dusoe v. Securis Int'l., Inc., 672 So.2d 89, 90 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (h...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Bloco, Inc. v. Porterfield Oil Co., Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • August 6, 2008
    ...be taxed against the defendant." Those fees may be assessed only against the judgment debtor. See Gaedeke Holdings, Ltd. v. Mortgage Consultants, Inc., 877 So.2d 824, 826 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). Porterfield filed another amended motion for attorney's fees. This time, it relied on the final jud......
  • Murphy & King, Prof'l Corp. v. Blackjet, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of Florida
    • May 26, 2016
    ...precepts in the same manner as the underlying Judgment is enforceable against it. Compare Gaedeke Holdings, Ltd. v. Mortgage Consultants, Inc., 877 So.2d 824, 826-27 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (plaintiff was not entitled to a direct award of attorneys' fees against impled defendants, but trial cou......
  • Paul v. Avrahami
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • April 12, 2017
    ...parties. See, e.g. , Bloco, Inc. v. Porterfield Oil Co. , 990 So.2d 578, 580 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) ; Gaedeke Holdings, Ltd. v. Mortg. Consultants, Inc. , 877 So.2d 824, 826 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) ; Dusoe v. Securis Int'l, Inc. , 672 So.2d 89, 90 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) ; Rosenfeld v. TPI Int'l Airway......
  • Kingston Corp. v. P'ship
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • November 27, 2013
    ...parties. See, e.g., Bloco, Inc. v. Porterfield Oil Co., 990 So.2d 578, 580 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008); Gaedeke Holdings, Ltd. v. Mortg. Consultants, Inc., 877 So.2d 824, 826 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004); Dusoe v. Securis Int'l, Inc., 672 So.2d 89, 90 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Rosenfeld v. TPI Int'l Airways, 630 ......
  • 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