41
Fla. L. Weekly D2341cTop of Form
Fla. L. Weekly D2341cTop of Form
Attorney’s
fees — Interest — Prejudgment interest on attorney’s fees should have been
assessed from date of order confirming arbitration award which determined
party’s entitlement to fees, not date of arbitration award — Amount of
prejudgment interest should have been calculated on amount of award and
included in judgment to bear post-judgment interest on the full amount
fees — Interest — Prejudgment interest on attorney’s fees should have been
assessed from date of order confirming arbitration award which determined
party’s entitlement to fees, not date of arbitration award — Amount of
prejudgment interest should have been calculated on amount of award and
included in judgment to bear post-judgment interest on the full amount
HDE,
INC., Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. BEE-LINE SUPPLY COMPANY, INC., ET AL.,
Appellees/Cross-Appellants. 5th District. Case No. 5D15-2805. Opinion filed
October 10, 2016. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Seminole County, Michael J.
Rudisill, Judge. Counsel: Atheseus R. Lockhart and Nicole C. Jackson, of Meier,
Bonner, Muszynski, O’Dell & Harvey, P.A., Longwood, for
Appellant/Cross-Appellee. Jim McCrae and J. Keith Ramsey, of Holland &
Knight LLP, Orlando, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant, Bee-Line Supply Company,
Inc. No Appearance for other Appellees/Cross-Appellants.
INC., Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. BEE-LINE SUPPLY COMPANY, INC., ET AL.,
Appellees/Cross-Appellants. 5th District. Case No. 5D15-2805. Opinion filed
October 10, 2016. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Seminole County, Michael J.
Rudisill, Judge. Counsel: Atheseus R. Lockhart and Nicole C. Jackson, of Meier,
Bonner, Muszynski, O’Dell & Harvey, P.A., Longwood, for
Appellant/Cross-Appellee. Jim McCrae and J. Keith Ramsey, of Holland &
Knight LLP, Orlando, for Appellee/Cross-Appellant, Bee-Line Supply Company,
Inc. No Appearance for other Appellees/Cross-Appellants.
(PER
CURIAM.) We affirm the trial court’s order awarding attorney’s fees to Bee-Line
Supply Company, Inc. However, as Bee-Line concedes, the prejudgment interest
awarded on the amount of the attorney’s fees should have been assessed from the
date of the order confirming the arbitration award, June 18, 2013, which
determined Bee-Line’s entitlement to fees, not March 9, 2011, the date of the
arbitration award; and the amount of prejudgment interest should have been
calculated on the amount of the award and included in the judgment to bear
post-judgment interest on the full amount. See Quality Engineered
Installation, Inc. v. Higley South, Inc., 670 So. 2d 929, 930-31 (Fla.
1996); Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. Wood, 676 So. 2d 464, 466 (Fla. 5th
DCA 1996). Accordingly, we remand only for the proper calculation of the
prejudgment interest.1
CURIAM.) We affirm the trial court’s order awarding attorney’s fees to Bee-Line
Supply Company, Inc. However, as Bee-Line concedes, the prejudgment interest
awarded on the amount of the attorney’s fees should have been assessed from the
date of the order confirming the arbitration award, June 18, 2013, which
determined Bee-Line’s entitlement to fees, not March 9, 2011, the date of the
arbitration award; and the amount of prejudgment interest should have been
calculated on the amount of the award and included in the judgment to bear
post-judgment interest on the full amount. See Quality Engineered
Installation, Inc. v. Higley South, Inc., 670 So. 2d 929, 930-31 (Fla.
1996); Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. Wood, 676 So. 2d 464, 466 (Fla. 5th
DCA 1996). Accordingly, we remand only for the proper calculation of the
prejudgment interest.1
AFFIRMED
in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED with instructions. (ORFINGER and
BERGER, JJ., and CRAGGS, A. M., Associate Judge, concur.)
in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED with instructions. (ORFINGER and
BERGER, JJ., and CRAGGS, A. M., Associate Judge, concur.)
__________________
1Appellee
filed a notice of cross-appeal on August 25, 2015; however, the cross-appeal is
deemed abandoned since Bee-Line did not file a cross-appeal initial brief.
filed a notice of cross-appeal on August 25, 2015; however, the cross-appeal is
deemed abandoned since Bee-Line did not file a cross-appeal initial brief.
* *
*
*