Dade Cnty. v. Pena, 664 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 1995). · Go Syfert
Search
Dade Cnty. v. Pena, 664 So. 2d 959 (Fla. 1995). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“a general rule of statutory construction in florida is that courts should not depart from the plain and unambiguous language of the statute.”
61 citation events (50 in the last 25 years) across 7 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: CHRISTOPHER BLINSTON v. PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE (fladistctapp, 2020-04-29)
Treatment trajectory · 1991 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1991 2008 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 46 distinct citers.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) CHRISTOPHER BLINSTON v. PALM BEACH COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2020 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
a general rule of statutory construction in florida is that courts should not depart from the plain and unambiguous language of the statute.
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Hilyer Sod, Inc. v. Willis Shaw Exp., Inc. (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2002 · signal: see · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
tatutes awarding attorney's fees must be strictly construed.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kent Walter Miller and Judith A. Miller v. ARCPE Bahamas, LLC, Successor in Interest to CapitalSource International, LLC F/K/A CaptialSource International, Inc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2025 · confidence medium
Florida “follows the ‘American Rule’ that attorney’s fees may only be awarded by a court pursuant to an entitling statute or an agreement of the parties.” Air Turbine Tech., Inc. v. Quarles & Brady, LLC, 165 So. 3d 816, 821 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (quoting Dade County v. Peña, 664 So. 2d 959, 960 (Fla. 1995)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) General Star National Insurance Company v. MDLV LLC
S.D. Fla. · 2024 · confidence medium
Co. v. Alvis, 72 So. 3d 314, 317 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (citing Dade Cnty v. Pena, 664 So. 2d 959, 960 (Fla. 1995)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Avini Health Corporation v. BioGenus LLC
S.D. Fla. · 2024 · confidence medium
Under Florida law, “attorney’s fees may only be awarded by a court pursuant to an entitling statute or an agreement of the parties.” Dade County v. Pena, 664 So. 2d 959, 960 (Fla. 1995).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) RJ's International Trading, LLC v. Crown Castle South, LLC
11th Cir. · 2024 · confidence medium
Accordingly, un- der Florida law, “attorney’s fees may only be awarded by a court pursuant to an entitling statute or an agreement of the parties.” Dade County v. Pena, 664 So. 2d 959, 960 (Fla. 1995).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Royal Palm Village Residents, Inc. v. Monica Slider
11th Cir. · 2023 · confidence medium
Because these statutes are “in derogation of the common law,” Roberts v. Carter, 350 So. 2d 78 , 78–79 (Fla. 1977), Florida courts—like those in many other jurisdictions—long ago adopted what has become the “well- established rule” that “statutes awarding attorney’s fees must be strictly construed,” Dade Cnty. v. Pena, 664 So. 2d 959, 960 (Fla. 1995) (quoting Gershuny v. Martin McFall Messenger Anesthesia Pro.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) DORAL COLLISION CENTER, INC. v. DAIMLER TRUST
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2022 · confidence medium
Dade Cnty. v. Pena, 664 So. 2d 959, 960 (Fla. 1995); see also Holly v. Auld, 450 So. 2d 217 , 219 6 (Fla. 1984) (“[C]ourts of this state are without power to construe an unambiguous statute in a way which would extend, modify, or limit, its express terms or its reasonable and obvious implications.” (quoting Am.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Deirdre Levesque v. Government Employees Insurance Company
11th Cir. · 2022 · confidence medium
Dade Cnty. v. Pena, 664 So. 2d 959, 960 (Fla. 1995).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Worlds v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.
M.D. Fla. · 2022 · confidence medium
Co. v. Americaribe-Moriarty JV, 906 F.3d 1329, 1335 (11th Cir. 2018) (citing Dade Cty. v. Pena, 664 So. 2d 959, 960 (Fla. 1995)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) SCHOOL BOARD OF MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2021 · confidence medium
Dade County v. Pena, 664 So. 2d 959, 960 (Fla. 1995); see Major League Baseball v. Morsani, 790 So. 2d 1071 , 1077–78 (Fla. 2001) (“[A] statute enacted in derogation of the common law must be strictly construed and . . . even where 7 the Legislature acts in a particular area, the common law remains in effect in that area unless the statute specifically says otherwise.”); see also Gershuny v. Martin McFall Messenger Anesthesia Prof’l Ass’n, 539 So. 2d 1131, 1132 (Fla. 1989) (“[T]he mention of one thing in a statute implies the exclusion of those things not expressly mentioned.”).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Royal Palm Village Residents, Inc. v. Slider
M.D. Fla. · 2021 · confidence medium
Dade Cty. v. Pena, 664 So. 2d 959, 960 (Fla. 1995) (quoting Gershuny v. Martin McFall Messenger Anesthesia Professional Ass'n, 539 So.2d 1131, 1132 (Fla.1989)); Willis Shaw Exp., Inc. v. Hilyer Sod, Inc., 849 So. 2d 276, 278 (Fla. 2003) (stating same).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Air Turbine Technology, Inc. v. Quarles & Brady, LLC, Quarles & Brady, LLP and Richard Horn (2×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
The state “follows the ‘American Rule’ that attorney’s fees may only be awarded by a court pursuant to an entitling statute or an agreement of the parties.” Dade Cnty. v. Peña, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995); see also R.J.
cited Cited as authority (rule) High Bid, LLC v. Kenneth Everett
11th Cir. · 2013 · confidence medium
Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995) (“[Attorney’s fees may only be awarded by a court pursuant to an entitling statute or an agreement of the parties.”).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Board of Trustees v. Parker
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2013 · confidence medium
Co. v. Alvis, 72 So.3d 314, 317 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (citing Dade Cnty. v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995)); see also State Farm Fire & Cas.
cited Cited as authority (rule) American Family Mutual Insurance Co. v. Alvis
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2011 · confidence medium
Dade Cnty. v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Sea World of Florida, Inc. v. Ace American Insurance Companies
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995) (Florida follows “American Rule” that attorney’s fees may only be awarded by court pursuant to entitling statute or parties’ agreement).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) BRASS & SINGER v. United Automobile Insurance Company
Fla. · 2006 · confidence medium
"Although legislative intent guides our analysis, to determine that intent we look first to the statute's plain meaning." V.K.E. v. State, 934 So.2d 1276, 1286 (Fla.2006) (citation omitted) (citing Knowles v. Beverly Enters.-Fla., Inc., 898 So.2d 1, 5 (Fla.2004); State v. Dugan, 685 So.2d 1210, 1212 (Fla.1996)). "[T]he statute's text is the most reliable and authoritative expression of the Legislature's intent." Id. "[I]t is also a well-established rule in Florida that `statutes awarding attorney's fees must be strictly construed.'" Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995) (quoting G…
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Goldman v. Campbell
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
Gershuny was then the basis for Dade County v. Peña, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995), repeating the same principle and the derogation canon. [4] We are still talking about statutes, not rules, being read under the derogation canon.
cited Cited as authority (rule) French v. Department of Children & Families
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Hauss v. Waxman
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
Gershuny was then the basis for Dade County v. Peña, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995), repeating the same principle and the derogation canon.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Mills v. Martinez
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
Willis Shaw Exp., Inc. v. Hilyer Sod, Inc., 849 So.2d 276, 277 (Fla.2003); see Major League Baseball v. Morsani, 790 So.2d 1071, 1077-78 (Fla.2001) (holding that "a statute enacted in derogation of the common law must be strictly construed . . ."); Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995) ("[I]t is also a well-established rule in Florida that `statutes awarding attorney's fees must be strictly construed.'") (quoting Gershuny v. Martin McFall Messenger Anesthesia Prof'l Ass'n, 539 So.2d 1131, 1132 (Fla.1989)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Willis Shaw Express, Inc. v. Hilyer Sod, Inc.
Fla. · 2003 · confidence medium
See Major League Baseball v. Morsani, 790 So.2d 1071, 1077-78 (Fla.2001) ("[A] statute enacted in derogation of the common law must be strictly construed...."); Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995) ("[I]t is also a well-established rule in Florida that `statutes awarding attorney's fees must be strictly construed.' Gershuny v. Martin McFall Messenger Anesthesia Professional Ass'n, 539 So.2d 1131, 1132 (Fla.1989).").
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hechtman v. NATIONS TITLE INS. OF NY., INC.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2000 · confidence medium
Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995); see also Holly v. Auld, 450 So.2d 217, 219 ("[w]hen the language of the statute is clear and unambiguous and conveys a clear and definite meaning, there is no occasion for resorting to the rules of statutory interpretation and construction; the statute must be given its plain and obvious meaning.") (quoting A.R.
cited Cited "see" Myers v. TOOJAY'S MANAGEMENT CORP.
M.D. Fla. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla. 1995).
cited Cited "see" ATTORNEY'S TITLE INS. FUND v. Landa-Posada
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959 (Fla. 1995).
cited Cited "see" Islander Beach Club Condominium v. Skylark
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995) ("[A]ttorney's fees may only be awarded by a court pursuant to an entitling statute or an agreement of the parties."); Plapinger v. E.
discussed Cited "see" Marks v. STATE, DEPT. OF LEGAL AFFAIRS
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995) ( quoting Gershuny v. Martin McFall Messenger Anesthesia Prof'l Ass'n, 539 So.2d 1131, 1132 (Fla.1989) ("it is also a well-established rule in Florida that `statutes awarding attorney's fees must be strictly construed'")).
discussed Cited "see" Thompson v. Hodson
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959 . 960 (Fla.1995) ("This Court follows the `American Rule' that attorney's fees may only be awarded by a court pursuant to an entitling statute or an agreement of the parties.") (citing Florida Patient's Comp.
cited Cited "see" O'Neill v. O'Neill
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2002 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959 (Fla.1995).
discussed Cited "see" Fremont Indem. Company v. Carey, Dwyer, Eckert, Mason & Spring, Pa
Fla. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995) ("This Court follows the `American Rule' that attorney's fees may only be awarded by a court pursuant to an entitling statute or an agreement of the parties.").
discussed Cited "see" Perez-Abreu, Zamora & De La Fe, P.A. v. Taracido
Fla. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995) (“This Court follows the ‘American Rule’ that attorney’s fees may only be awarded by a court pursuant to an entitling statute or an agreement of the parties.”).
discussed Cited "see" PEREZ-ABREU, ZAMORA, PA v. Taracido
Fla. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995) ("This Court follows the `American Rule' that attorney's fees may only be awarded by a court pursuant to an entitling statute or an agreement of the parties.").
cited Cited "see" Herbert H. Davis v. National Medical Enterprises
11th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995) (holding that attorneys' fees may not be awarded absent a statutory or contractual provision for such fees).
discussed Cited "see" Herbert H. Davis v. National Medical Enterprises
11th Cir. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla. 1995) (holding that attorneys’ fees may not be awarded absent a statutory or contractual provision for such fees).
cited Cited "see" Robinson v. Peeler
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995).
cited Cited "see" Coffie v. District Board of Trustees
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1999 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959 (Fla.1995).
cited Cited "see" Lavado v. General Electric Capital Auto Financial Services, Inc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1998 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995); Crooks v. State Farm Mut.
cited Cited "see" Herbert H. Davis v. National Medical Enterprises, Inc.
11th Cir. · 1991 · signal: see · confidence high
See Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995) (holding that attorneys’ fees may not be awarded absent a statutory or contractual provision for such fees).
cited Cited "see, e.g." R.J. Reynolds Tobacco v. Ward
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2014 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959 (Fla.1995) (citing Gershuny v. Martin McFall Messenger Anesthesia Professional Ass'n, 539 So.2d 1131, 1132 (Fla.1989).) Nationwide Mut.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Durden v. CITICORP TRUST BANK, FSB
M.D. Fla. · 2011 · signal: see also · confidence medium
“Under Florida law, each party generally bears its own attorneys’ fees unless a contract or statute provides otherwise.” United States v. Pepper’s Steel & Alloys, Inc., 289 F.3d 741 , 742 (11th Cir.2002) (per curiam) (citation omitted); see also Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." General Motors Corp. v. Sanchez
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2009 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Dade County v. Peña, 664 So.2d 959 (Fla.1995) (holding that statutory provision for attorneys’ fees in successful action for loss of wages did not apply to fees incurred in administrative proceeding which resulted in order reinstating county employee with back pay); cf. § 681.1095(13), Fla. Stat. (2008) (attorneys’ fees specifically permitted in Lemon Law proceeding only when manufacturer unsuccessfully appeals from adverse decision of arbitration board).
cited Cited "see, e.g." Walker v. CASH REGISTER AUTO INS.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959 (Fla.1995).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co. v. Nu-Best Diagnostic Labs, Inc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2002 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959 (Fla.1995) (citing Gershuny v. Martin McFall Messenger Anesthesia Professional Ass'n, 539 So.2d 1131, 1132 (Fla.1989).) Earlier cases have said that an award of fees to an insured is in the nature of a penalty against an insurer, and for that reason the authorizing statute must be strictly construed.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Friends of Nassau County, Inc. v. Nassau County
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2000 · signal: compare · confidence low
Compare Davis v. School Bd. of Gadsden County, 646 So.2d 766, 769 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), with Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959 (Fla.1995). [14] The administrative law judge forcefully identified what she perceived as several problems with the "actions of the attorneys." We note, however, the massive discovery and prompt settlement that took place in the present case. 38.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Frymer v. Brettschneider
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1998 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence medium
See, e.g., Dade County v. Pena, 664 So.2d 959, 960 (Fla.1995); Cadenhead v. Gaetz, 677 So.2d 96 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996).
DADE COUNTY, etc., Petitioner,
v.
Humberto PENA, Respondent.
85023.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Dec 14, 1995.
664 So. 2d 959
Harding.
Cited by 53 opinions  |  Published

Robert A. Ginsburg, Dade County Attorney and John McInnis, Assistant County Attorney, Miami, for Petitioner.

Phillip J. Goldstein of the Law Offices of Phillip J. Goldstein, P.A., Miami, for Respondent.

HARDING, Justice.

We have for review Pena v. Dade County, 648 So.2d 1199 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994), in which the Third District Court of Appeal certified conflict with the opinions in Werthman v. School Board of Seminole County, 599 So.2d 220 (Fla.5th DCA 1992) and Davis v. School Board of Gadsden County, 646 So.2d 766 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const.

The Third District Court of Appeal held that Humberto Pena was entitled to attorney's fees under section 448.08, Florida Statutes (1985), for his appeal to an administrative board, where he successfully petitioned for reinstatement as a county bus operator. Because Pena's administrative appeal was[*960] not an "action for back wages" as explicitly required by section 448.08, we quash the decision below.

Pena was dismissed from his job as a bus operator for Metropolitan Dade County's Metro Dade Transit Agency (MDTA) after his bus struck a pedestrian and a parked car, and post-accident toxicology tests revealed the presence of a tranquilizer in his blood. Pursuant to section 2-47, Code of Metropolitan Dade County, Pena appealed his dismissal to the County Manager.

The County Manager accepted the hearing officer's recommendation that Pena's dismissal be reduced to a thirty-day suspension: he reinstated Pena as a bus driver and ordered back pay for the period between his dismissal and subsequent reinstatement, less thirty days for the suspension. When Pena and MDTA were unable to agree on the amount of back pay owed, Pena filed an action in circuit court seeking not only a determination of the amount of back pay owed, but also attorney's fees for the circuit court action and for fees incurred in the administrative appeal of the disciplinary action.

Court-ordered mediation resulted in an agreement as to the amount of back pay owed. The court determined that section 448.08 entitled Pena to attorney's fees for the action at law, but not for the administrative appeal.

On appeal, the Third District Court of Appeal reversed the circuit court's order and held that section 448.08 also applied to the administrative proceeding which resulted in Pena's reinstatement. The district court relied on its earlier decision in Metropolitan Dade County v. Stein, 384 So.2d 167 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), but certified direct conflict with Werthman v. School Board, 599 So.2d 220 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992), and Davis v. School Board, 646 So.2d 766 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994), on this issue.

This Court follows the "American Rule" that attorney's fees may only be awarded by a court pursuant to an entitling statute or an agreement of the parties. See Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145, 1148 (Fla. 1985), modified, Standard Guar. Ins. Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So.2d 828 (Fla. 1990). The statute Pena relies upon in the instant case provides: "The court may award to the prevailing party in an action for unpaid wages costs of the action and a reasonable attorney's fee." § 448.08, Fla. Stat. (1985).

A general rule of statutory construction in Florida is that courts should not depart from the plain and unambiguous language of the statute. Citizens of State v. Public Serv. Comm'n, 425 So.2d 534, 541-42 (Fla. 1982). Moreover, it is also a well-established rule in Florida that "statutes awarding attorney's fees must be strictly construed." Gershuny v. Martin McFall Messenger Anesthesia Professional Ass'n, 539 So.2d 1131, 1132 (Fla. 1989).

Both of the cases cited by the district court as conflicting dealt with administrative proceedings to overturn terminations within a public school setting. Werthman, which was explicitly followed by Davis, held that "termination proceedings brought by a school board under Chapter 231 ... [do] not involve proceedings to recover `unpaid wages,' except in the most tangential sense." Werthman, 599 So.2d at 221. We approve both of these cases to the extent that they interpret section 448.08 to require a literal "action for back wages" as a prerequisite to recovery.

In the instant case, Pena sought reinstatement before the administrative tribunal, claiming he was wrongfully dismissed. This was not an action for back wages. At the administrative level, any claim as to whether Pena was entitled to receive back wages was purely tangential to the determination of his right to reinstatement. Whatever back pay Pena ultimately received as part of the relief granted does not change the underlying nature of the administrative claim filed. Section 448.08 is clear and unambiguous on its face: there must be "an action for back wages," section 448.08, Florida Statutes (1985) (emphasis added), to implicate the statutory entitlement.

For the reasons stated above, we quash the decision of the district court and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

It is so ordered.

[*961] GRIMES, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, KOGAN, WELLS and ANSTEAD, JJ., concur.