42
Fla. L. Weekly D1884bop of Form
Fla. L. Weekly D1884bop of Form
Attorney’s
fees — Evidence was insufficient to support fee award where the only evidence
detailing work actually completed consisted of affidavit and related documents
that were neither introduced into evidence nor stipulated to at hearing
fees — Evidence was insufficient to support fee award where the only evidence
detailing work actually completed consisted of affidavit and related documents
that were neither introduced into evidence nor stipulated to at hearing
JOEL EDWARD CHANDLER, Appellant, v.
KCCS, INC., Appellee. 2nd District. Case No. 2D16-3091. Opinion filed August
30, 2017. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; John M. Radabaugh,
Judge. Counsel: Nathan A. Carney of Carney Law Firm, P.A., Tampa, for
Appellant. Brant Hargrove, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
KCCS, INC., Appellee. 2nd District. Case No. 2D16-3091. Opinion filed August
30, 2017. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Polk County; John M. Radabaugh,
Judge. Counsel: Nathan A. Carney of Carney Law Firm, P.A., Tampa, for
Appellant. Brant Hargrove, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
(PER CURIAM.) Joel Chandler appeals
from a final order awarding KCCS, Inc., fees pursuant to section 57.105(1),
Florida Statutes (2016). We affirm the decision to award sanctions but reverse
as to the amount awarded. Although there was evidence presented at the
evidentiary hearing as to the hourly rate and the reasonableness of the fees,
the only evidence detailing the work actually completed consisted of an
affidavit and related documents that were neither introduced into evidence nor
stipulated to at the hearing. The evidence was thus insufficient to support the
award. See Saussy v. Saussy, 560 So. 2d 1385, 1386 (Fla. 2d DCA
1990) (“To support a fee award, there must be the following: (1) evidence detailing
the services performed and (2) expert testimony as to the reasonableness of the
fee.” (citing Nivens v. Nivens, 312 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975))); Diwakar
v. Montecito Palm Beach Condo. Ass’n, 143 So. 3d 958, 960 (Fla. 4th DCA
2014) (“Competent evidence includes invoices, records and other information
detailing the services provided as well as the testimony from the attorney in
support of the fee.” (quoting Brewer v. Solovsky, 945 So. 2d 610, 611
(Fla. 4th DCA 2006))). Because there was some competent evidence presented to
support the award, we remand for further proceedings as to the proper amount of
fees. See Colson v. State Farm Bank, F.S.B., 183 So. 3d 1038,
1040 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (“[W]here the record includes some evidence supporting
the fee . . . award, this court may remand for further proceedings.”); Morton
v. Heathcock, 913 So. 2d 662, 670 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (reversing fee award
because record did “not include the essential evidentiary support” required but
remanding for additional hearing because record contained “some competent
substantial evidence to support a fee award”); see also Xhelaj v.
McCormick 105, LLC, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D1286 (Fla. 2d DCA June 2, 2017).
from a final order awarding KCCS, Inc., fees pursuant to section 57.105(1),
Florida Statutes (2016). We affirm the decision to award sanctions but reverse
as to the amount awarded. Although there was evidence presented at the
evidentiary hearing as to the hourly rate and the reasonableness of the fees,
the only evidence detailing the work actually completed consisted of an
affidavit and related documents that were neither introduced into evidence nor
stipulated to at the hearing. The evidence was thus insufficient to support the
award. See Saussy v. Saussy, 560 So. 2d 1385, 1386 (Fla. 2d DCA
1990) (“To support a fee award, there must be the following: (1) evidence detailing
the services performed and (2) expert testimony as to the reasonableness of the
fee.” (citing Nivens v. Nivens, 312 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975))); Diwakar
v. Montecito Palm Beach Condo. Ass’n, 143 So. 3d 958, 960 (Fla. 4th DCA
2014) (“Competent evidence includes invoices, records and other information
detailing the services provided as well as the testimony from the attorney in
support of the fee.” (quoting Brewer v. Solovsky, 945 So. 2d 610, 611
(Fla. 4th DCA 2006))). Because there was some competent evidence presented to
support the award, we remand for further proceedings as to the proper amount of
fees. See Colson v. State Farm Bank, F.S.B., 183 So. 3d 1038,
1040 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (“[W]here the record includes some evidence supporting
the fee . . . award, this court may remand for further proceedings.”); Morton
v. Heathcock, 913 So. 2d 662, 670 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (reversing fee award
because record did “not include the essential evidentiary support” required but
remanding for additional hearing because record contained “some competent
substantial evidence to support a fee award”); see also Xhelaj v.
McCormick 105, LLC, 42 Fla. L. Weekly D1286 (Fla. 2d DCA June 2, 2017).
Reversed and remanded. (VILLANTI,
SLEET, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.)
SLEET, and SALARIO, JJ., Concur.)
* * *