Little v. Bath & Kitchen Boutique, LLC
In a construction-contract dispute, the Third DCA affirmed an award of reciprocal contractual attorney's fees under section 57.105(7) to the defendant, including fees incurred litigating the plaintiff's prejudgment writ of garnishment, holding that ancillary garnishment proceedings were 'with respect to' the contract under Ham v. Portfolio Recovery Associates. The court reversed the trial court's application of a 1.5 contingency risk multiplier because there was no direct (non-inferential) evidence that the prevailing party would have had substantial difficulty obtaining competent counsel absent a multiplier.
Key facts
- Plaintiff Little sued defendant Bath & Kitchen Boutique, LLC in a construction contract dispute; plaintiff obtained a prejudgment writ of garnishment as an ancillary proceeding.
- The trial court awarded reciprocal contractual attorney's fees to defendant under section 57.105(7), including fees for the garnishment litigation, and applied a 1.5 contingency risk multiplier to the fee award.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
The opinion extends Ham's broad 'with respect to the contract' analysis beyond common-law claims to ancillary garnishment proceedings, giving prevailing parties a route to recover fees for collateral, writ-related… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.