Anthony D. Duke v. Joel Hoch, Home Indem. Co., Garnishee-Appellee, 475 F.2d 761 (5th Cir. 1972). · Go Syfert
Search
Anthony D. Duke v. Joel Hoch, Home Indem. Co., Garnishee-Appellee, 475 F.2d 761 (5th Cir. 1972). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
2 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Dadeland Depot, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance (ca11, 2007-04-12)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Dadeland Depot, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance
11th Cir. · 2007 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Duke v. Hoch, 475 F.2d 761 (5th Cir.1972) (stating that attorney’s fees may be granted under Fla. Stat. § 627.428 “should the appellant ultimately prevail,” and stating that “prevailing] in the statutory sense” includes a “final judgment entered for appellant”) (internal citation, alteration, and quotations omitted).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Anthony D. DUKE, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Joel HOCH Et Al., Defendants, Home Indemnity Company, Garnishee-Appellee
71-2223.
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Feb 20, 1972.
475 F.2d 761
Marvin H. Gillman, Miami, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant., William M. Hoeveler, Miami, Fla., for garnishee-appellee.
Bell, Ainsworth, Godbold.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

By our decision in Duke v. Hoch, et al., 468 F.2d 973 (5th Cir., 1972) we reversed a judgment entered for the insurer-garnishee and remanded for further proceedings. Counsel for the appellant has filed a motion for allowance of attorney fees for his services on appeal, pursuant to Florida Statute 627.428, F.S.A. [1] The motion is denied without prejudice to application in the trial court for fees allowable under § 627.428, for services on appeal, should the appellant ultimately “prevail.” “While he has won a round in this bout, the cause is not yet concluded in his favor, and we think that he has not yet ‘prevailed’ in the statutory sense.” Segelstrom v. Blue Shield of Florida, Inc., 233 So.2d 645, 646 (Fla.App.1970). As in Segelstrom, “should final judgment be entered for [appellant] the trial judge may then evaluate the briefs filed in aid of this appeal and determine appropriate compensation.” Id. at 646.

1

. Formerly § 627.0127.