Partner
In Kenmort Properties v. Emergency Services, Inc. (3d DCA), the trial court exercised its broad discretion to declare there was no prevailing party, and, therefore, no entitlement to attorneys’ fees. Both sides had failed to achieve their core objectives, and yet both had moved for fees. The court called it a draw.
The case is a reminder that, although contractual or statutory fee provisions often direct fees to “the prevailing party,” trial courts have considerable discretion to call it a tie. Accordingly, the Third DCA affirmed, applying a deferential standard of review — whether any reasonable jurist could reach the decision. Since the answer was yes, the ruling stood.
This discretionary space is often underestimated. While litigants may believe that even a partial win qualifies them for fees, courts routinely evaluate the net success of the litigation, including the claims asserted, relief achieved, and procedural posture.
Takeaway: If the controversy does not lend itself to a clear winner, or if you overreach with your claims, you may not be entitled to fees at the end of the case.
At Boatman Ricci, we counsel clients not just on the merits of a case — but on the strategic and financial risks that follow the final order.
* * * * * * * * * *
THIS BLOG IS INTENDED FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE. THE READER SHOULD CONSULT WITH KNOWLEDGEABLE LEGAL COUNSEL TO DETERMINE HOW APPLICABLE LAWS APPLY TO SPECIFIC FACTS AND SITUATIONS. BLOG POSTS ARE BASED ON THE MOST CURRENT INFORMATION AT THE TIME THEY ARE WRITTEN. SINCE IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE LAWS OR OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES MAY HAVE CHANGED SINCE PUBLICATION, PLEASE CALL US TO DISCUSS ANY ACTION YOU MAY BE CONSIDERING AS A RESULT OF READING THIS BLOG.