Vogel v. Allen, 83-275
| Decision Date | 29 December 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 83-275,83-275 |
| Citation | 443 So.2d 368 |
| Parties | Leo VOGEL, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. George E. ALLEN, Jr., et al., Appellee, and Dan A. Wilcox, Appellee/Cross-Appellant. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Fred S. Disselkoen, Jr., of Duffett, Seps & Akers, Ormond Beach, for appellant/cross-appellee.
William L. Townsend, Jr., and Kate L. Walton, of Walton & Townsend, Palatka, for appellee/cross-appellant Wilcox.
No appearance for appellee Allen.
Vogel appeals from an order of the trial court assessing costs and attorney's fees against him pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (1981). We reverse certain of the costs because we think they were not proper, and we reverse the attorney's fee award because we do not think there was a complete absence of justiciable issues of law and fact raised by Vogel's complaint. See Allen v. Dutton, 384 So.2d 171 (Fla. 5th DCA), cert. denied, 392 So.2d 1373 (Fla.1980).
Vogel filed a complaint against Flagler County and the City of Bunnell for having commenced construction of roads across his property without having an easement or right-of-way. In the alternative, he sued Wilcox for having failed to show in his survey, done for Vogel at the time he purchased the land, a recorded plat subdividing Vogel's property into lots and streets. He also sued the former landowners for breach of covenants contained in his warranty deed for selling him land which was subject to the platted roads.
The pertinent paragraphs regarding Wilcox allege that Vogel owned certain real estate in the Northeast Quarter of Section 15, Range 30 East, of Flagler County. At the time of the purchase, Vogel engaged Wilcox, a registered Florida land surveyor, to do a survey of the land. A copy of the survey was attached and it showed no platted road or streets.
Vogel alleged that the land he purchased was subject to the platted roads and lots contained in a plat recorded in Map Book 2, page 2, City of Bunnell. A copy of the plat was attached, and it purports to encompass lands in the Northeast Quarter of Section 15. Vogel alleged he relied on the survey in buying the property, and had suffered damages when the City and County commenced working on the platted roads.
Wilcox filed three motions to dismiss the complaint, all of which were granted. Each time, Vogel was allowed to amend his complaint. The final time, the count regarding Wilcox was dismissed with prejudice. The order was not appealed.
The issue in this case, for purposes of reviewing the validity of the attorney's fee award against Vogel pursuant to section 57.105, is whether the complaint against Wilcox was frivolous, or whether as a matter of law, it stated or came close to stating a cause of action against him. 1 On its face, the complaint against Wilcox states a cause of action. A surveyor who is retained to do a survey of real estate for a client must perform his task in a professional manner.
The general standard of conduct in such cases is that a professional man must exercise that degree of care which a skilled man of his profession, using ordinary prudence, would exercise under like circumstances. Reasonable care or skill is the measure of obligation created by the implied contract of a surgeon, lawyer, or any other professional practitioner.
Clark on Surveying and Boundaries, § 11 (J. Grimes 4th ed. 1976). Vogel alleged sufficient facts to establish Wilcox owed him a duty to survey in a professional, competent manner when he simply alleged he retained Wilcox to do the survey.
Further, Vogel alleged sufficient facts in the complaint to establish that Wilcox breached his professional duty by failing to show on the survey the streets and lot lines contained in a plat of record. The minimum requirements for an adequate survey of land that have been approved by the Florida Society of Professional Land Surveyors and the Florida Land Title Association include the implied duty to show recorded streets and lot lines.
If the survey is of all or any part of a lot or of several lots in a recorded subdivision, all lot numbers (including those of adjoining lots) and block numbers should be shown on the plat. If the survey is of part of a lot or several lots, the dimensions of the excluded part of the lot or lots must be shown on the plat....
All public and private rights of way shown on recorded plats adjoining or crossing the lands surveyed must be located and shown on the plat.... If streets abutting the lands surveyed are not opened physically, a note to this effect should be shown.
The Florida Bar Continuing Legal Education, I Florida Real Property Practice §§ 13.21--.22 (2d ed. 1971). The complaint alleges Wilcox was a registered Florida land surveyor. That in itself created a duty to show any recorded plat on the survey.
Finally, the injury allegedly suffered by Vogel and its relation to Wilcox' alleged breach of duty was sufficiently set forth in the complaint to withstand a motion...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Estate of Starling, In re, 82-1457
...Dr. Saha did not know the pump was being negligently used. Green Springs, Inc. v. Calvera, 239 So.2d 264 (Fla.1970); Vogel v. Allen, 443 So.2d 368 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). In any event, Florida case law does not shield a landowner from liability if a child is injured on his premises by an "attr......
-
Wright v. Yurko
...a cause of action for malicious prosecution, the award of attorney's fees to Greene under section 57.105 was improper. Vogel v. Allen, 443 So.2d 368 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). In the Yurko suit, similar pleadings were taken beyond bare allegations. Counsel for Yurko moved for summary judgment and......
-
Carr Smith & Associates, Inc. v. Fence Masters, Inc.
...may be held liable for their negligent acts. See, Cristich v. Allen Eng'g, Inc., 458 So.2d 76 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Vogel v. Allen, 443 So.2d 368 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); accord Kent v. Bartlett, 49 Cal.App.3d 724, 122 Cal.Rptr. 615 (1975); Hutchinson v. Dubeau, 161 Ga.App. 65, 289 S.E.2d 4 (198......
-
Hollywood Firemen's Pension Fund v. Terlizzese
...the taking of an appeal in this context. On the merits of this appeal from the costs judgment, the Board, relying on Vogel v. Allen, 443 So.2d 368 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), wherein it was held that the cost of Xerox copies are part of normal office expenses of counsel and are not recoverable, as......
-
A practitioner's guide to the taxation of costs in civil actions.
...Rust Fund, 489 So. 2d 869, 870 (Fla. 3d D.C.A. 1986). (69) Guidelines [sections] 4. (70) Guidelines [sections] 7; Vogel v. Allen, 443 So. 2d 368, 370 (Fla. 5th D.C.A. (71) Caceres v. Physicians Protective Rust Fund, 489 So. 2d 869, 870 (Fla. 3d D.C.A. 1986). (72) Guidelines [sections] 7. (7......