Law Firm of Spector, Gadon & Rosen, P. C. v. Richard Davis
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledFebruary 26, 2020
Docket2D19-0860
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING
MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
In re Guardianship of: Fern S. Davis, an )
incapacitated person. )
___________________________________)
)
LAW FIRM OF SPECTOR, GADON & )
ROSEN, P.C., )
)
Appellant, )
)
v. ) Case No. 2D19-860
)
RICHARD DAVIS and JUNE )
HETZNECKER, agents for Fern S. Davis, )
an incapacitated person. )
)
Appellees. )
)
Opinion filed February 26, 2020.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Collier
County; Lauren L. Brodie, Judge.
Amy L. Christiansen and Michael J.
McGirney of Spector, Gadon, Rosen, &
Vinci, LLP, Saint Petersburg; and Paul R.
Rosen and John Da Grosa of Smith of
Spector, Gadon, Rosen, and Vinci, P.C.,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania for Appellant.
Robert E. Biasotti of Biasotti Law, Saint
Petersburg, for Appellees.
PER CURIAM.
Although the proceedings below were not conducted in an ideal manner,
we can find no basis to reverse the order on appeal for this Appellant, save for one
issue. From our review, the circuit court erred when it granted Appellees' motion for
attorney's fees based on the circuit court's inherent authority to sanction inequitable
conduct. See Moakley v. Smallwood, 826 So. 2d 221, 227 (Fla. 2002) ("[T]he trial
court's exercise of the inherent authority to assess attorneys' fees against an attorney
must be based upon an express finding of bad faith conduct and must be supported by
detailed factual findings describing the specific acts of bad faith conduct that resulted in
the unnecessary incurrence of attorneys' fees. Thus, a finding of bad faith conduct must
be predicated on a high degree of specificity in the factual findings."); Bitterman v.
Bitterman, 714 So. 2d 356, 365 (Fla. 1998) ("We note that this doctrine is rarely
applicable. It is reserved for those extreme cases where a party acts 'in bad faith,
vexatiously, wantonly, or for oppressive reasons.' " (quoting Foster v. Tourtellotte, 704
F.2d 1109, 1111 (9th Cir. 1983))); Hallac v. Hallac, 88 So. 3d 253, 259 (Fla. 4th DCA
2012) ("Such awards are rarely applicable and should be reserved for extreme cases in
which a party litigates vexatiously and in bad faith."). Therefore, we must affirm the
order below, except to the extent that it sanctioned Appellant with Appellees' attorneys'
fees. That part of the order is reversed.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded.
LUCAS, ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
-2-