R. W. King Construction Co. v. City of Melbourne

ON REHEARING GRANTED

ORFINGER, Judge.

Appellee suggests that our reversal of the award of $4,000 for extraordinary attorney’s fees was based upon the erroneous *656premise, as stated in the original opinion, that no evidence other than the affidavit of appellee’s attorney was submitted to the trial court. We did make that statement in the original opinion and we overlooked the order entered by the trial court which states that the court has considered the affidavit and the “. . . testimony of the expert witnesses in regard to a reasonable attorney’s fee presented by plaintiff and defendants . . . ”

I…