Filed: Oct. 13, 2011
Latest Update: Oct. 13, 2011
Summary: PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. PALMER and LAWSON, JJ., concur. EVANDER, J., dissents with opinion. EVANDER, J., dissenting. While I acknowledge that the "abuse of discretion" standard of review is a deferential one, I believe a reversal is required. Given the ultimate outcome below, this was an ideal case for the trial court to hold that neither side was the "prevailing party" and to decline to make an award of attorney's fees. See, e.g., Merchants Bonding Co. (Mutual) v. City of Melbourne, 83
Summary: PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. PALMER and LAWSON, JJ., concur. EVANDER, J., dissents with opinion. EVANDER, J., dissenting. While I acknowledge that the "abuse of discretion" standard of review is a deferential one, I believe a reversal is required. Given the ultimate outcome below, this was an ideal case for the trial court to hold that neither side was the "prevailing party" and to decline to make an award of attorney's fees. See, e.g., Merchants Bonding Co. (Mutual) v. City of Melbourne, 832..
More
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED.
PALMER and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
EVANDER, J., dissents with opinion.
EVANDER, J., dissenting.
While I acknowledge that the "abuse of discretion" standard of review is a deferential one, I believe a reversal is required. Given the ultimate outcome below, this was an ideal case for the trial court to hold that neither side was the "prevailing party" and to decline to make an award of attorney's fees. See, e.g., Merchants Bonding Co. (Mutual) v. City of Melbourne, 832 So.2d 184 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Brevard County Fair Ass'n v. Cocoa Expo, Inc., 832 So.2d 147 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Lasco Enters., Inc. v. Kohlbrand, 819 So.2d 821 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).
