Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

474 So. 2d 392

474 So.2d 392

10 Fla.L.Weekly 1992

Docket No. 85-568.

Metropolitan Dade County v. Evans

METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, Appellant, v. Herbert EVANS, Jr., Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 20, 1985.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1985-08-20

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“the dismissal operated to terminate any proceeding against the officer ... a merits determination is not a prerequisite to an award of attorney's fees where the statute provides that they will inure to the party who prevails.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 544 So. 2d 230 - City of Fort Walton Beach v. Grant

“reimburse any such defendant who prevails in the action for court costs and reasonable attorney's fees.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 544 So. 2d 230 - City of Fort Walton Beach v. Grant

Relies on STATE, DEPT. OF HEALTH & REHAB. SERV. v. Hall · 407 So. 2d 277 - Nuzum v. Valdes · Sacks v. Rickles

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1985-08-20

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently August 2007

8 state decisions

30198519902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*393 Robert A. Ginsburg, County Atty. and Roy Wood, Asst. County Atty., for appellant.

¶2Richard L. Katz, Coral Gables, for appellee.

¶3Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARKDULL and HENDRY, JJ.

¶4SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

¶5The trial court held that the appellee, a police officer who was joined as a co-defendant with his employer, Dade County, in a civil damage action arising out of his official duties, had "prevailed" when the case against him was dismissed with prejudice pursuant to a settlement effected by the county, and that he was therefore entitled to reimbursement of his attorney's fees under section 111.07, Florida Statutes (1983).[1] See generally, Nuzum v. Valdes,407 So.2d 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981). Since the dismissal operated to terminate finally any proceeding against the officer, see Sacks v. Rickles,155 So.2d 400 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963), and, as we held in State Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Hall,409 So.2d 193, 195 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), "a merits determination is not a prerequisite to an award of attorney's fees where the statute provides that they will inure to the party who prevails", the order is

¶6Affirmed.

NOTES

¶7[1] The section provides:

¶8Any agency of the state, or any county, municipality, or political subdivision of the state, is authorized to provide an attorney to defend any civil action arising from a complaint for damages or injury suffered as a result of any act or omission of action of any of its officers, employees, or agents for an act or omission arising out of and in the scope of his employment or function... . If any agency of the state or any county, municipality, or political subdivision of the state is authorized pursuant to this section to provide an attorney to defend a civil action arising from a complaint for damages or injury suffered as a result of any act or omission of action of any of its officers, employees, or agents and fails to provide such attorney, such agency, county, municipality, or political subdivision shall reimburse any such defendant who prevails in the action for court costs and reasonable attorney's fees.

/474/so2d/392 · .json · Public domain