Legal Opinion

Ring Power Corp. v. Condado-Perez

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided August 18, 2017No. Case No. 2D16-3769Published

1Per curiam

In light of the reversal of the underlying judgment on which the attorney’s fee order in this appeal is based, Ring Power Corp. v. Condado-Perez, 219 So.3d 1028, 1030 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017), we reverse the order on attorney’s fees. See ARC Foods, Inc. v. MGI Props., 746 So.2d 514, 514 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Siegel v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, 100 So.3d 783, 784 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); S & I Invs. v. Payless Flea Mkt., Inc., 40 So.3d 48, 49 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010).

Reversed.

KHOUZAM, SALARIO, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ring Power Corporation v. Condado-PerezDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2017
  2. ARC Foods, Inc. v. MGI PropertiesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1999
  3. S & I INVESTMENTS v. Payless Flea Market, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2010
  4. Siegel v. J.P. Morgan Chase BankDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012