HomeMy WebLinkAbout0943 d~plioatfon., There ere other examplcs, ouoh ao 0ome h~aringe,
rasearvh ~ad•other ~a~tar~, sowever, th~ Court doe• not feel ~h~ ~ _
, . ~
duplication ie to the ~rame.~Ytent as opinea by the expert 'Y
witneae f~r Plainti~f'f . :
Aecording~y, the Court finde the tiroe reaean$b~e expended.by
t~e attorney for.the De~endant in thxe oase to be 28 houre. - -
The next step for the Court ia:to determfne the -reaeo~able
: hourly rate due to. Defendant'e attorney. for thio '~ype of
: Iitigation.: The Court hae coneidered a1T of the oriteria fox
thia iesue: ae set iorth,in owe a~d the testitnony of the
~i~nes$e~. It finde a~reaaonahle.rate for Defendan~'s attorney to
_ be $150.00 per ho~tr. ' ~ ~
- ~ Baesd ;upon the foregoin~,` the lode~tar reault in thie ca~e _
is $2,700.00. _ ~ : -
Whe~ a-prevailing party*e couneel ie ~employed on a
contingency basis. Rowe at 1151 requries the trial court to , `
coneider a-~ontingency risk factor ~n awarding attor~eys feea.
Nhile'the Cou~t does np~ have a prabl~em with Defendant~e couneel
handling thi8 caee on.a contingency baeie, it is coincerned ~bout
" the faet that the arra~ngeaent was not reduced to Writing. Aule
4- 1.511) snd ~2I of tD~e rule• Regulating The Florida Bar
require all conting~nt fee contracte to be in w~iting.
8owever, under the "PRSAMHL$= Scope" of the Rulee, it =
- appeare clear to the Court that they are not to be utilized by . -
op~poeing parties s~e a defenee in . ease8 su~li aa thia. Therefore,
this Court ehould coneider ~he contingency riek factor -and it
fe~le a multiglier of 2.0 to be reaeonable. ,
It is th~reupon
ORDERBD AND ADJODGBD tha~ I?efendantB, FREDBRICK.L. ANDREOLI :
- and . MARY M. ANARFALI, bia ~?ife, do have and recc~ver ~from
.
Plaintiff, T8B ATLANTIS SOYLDINt3 B. CQNQOI~INItIM ASBOCIAT'ZON,
-
INC,, ae reagQnable attorneye ~eee in thio matter the swn of "
~ $5,440.00 for whieh Iet ex~cution i.esue. Thie ~udgca~nt ehall
P~ ~45 ~ -
. _ . . ~ :
_ .
~t~
. a-_-~.
- _ . - _ _ - - -
~ . . :
_ . . . _ . ~ ~
: