Cases from cite.case.law:

FOUNTAINBLEAU, LLC, a v. HIRE US, INC. a a, 273 So. 3d 1152 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Thus, before the court could invoke the nonbinding arbitration statute, section 44.103, Florida Statutes . . . and Hire Us agree that the court ordered the parties to nonbinding arbitration pursuant to section 44.103 . . . See § 44.103(2) ("A court, pursuant to rules adopted by the Supreme Court, may refer any contested civil . . .

WINTER GREEN AT WINTER PARK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. v. WARE, 264 So. 3d 1143 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . See § 44.103(2), Fla. . . .

BUCHWALD CAPITAL ADVISORS, LLC, FOR GREEKTOWN LITIGATION TRUST, v. SAULT STE. MARIE TRIBE OF CHIPPEWA INDIANS In LLC, LLC, v., 584 B.R. 706 (E.D. Mich. 2018)

. . . ECF No. 649-6, Tribal Code, Chapter 44, Section 44.103.) . . .

HAROLD, v. L. SANDERS, M. D. L. M. D. P. A. L. M. D. M. D. P. A. M. D. P. A., 159 So. 3d 338 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . Section 44.103, Florida Statutes (2012), and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.820(h) provide that a . . . Harold argues that her objection and demand for trial de novo were timely under section 44.103 and rules . . . Section 44.103 sets forth the process for court-ordered, nonbinding arbitration. . . . Thus, section 44.103(5) and rule 1.820(h) provide a party twenty days after service of the arbitrator . . . We are not persuaded by these arguments because neither section 44.103(5) nor rule 1.820(h) provides . . .

C. V. ALEXANDER, Jr. v. QUAIL POINTE II CONDOMINIUM,, 170 So. 3d 817 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)

. . . At a hearing, Quail Pointe argued that Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.820 and section 44.103, Florida . . . Nonbinding arbitration is governed substantively by section 44.103, Florida Statutes, and procedurally . . . parties, unless a motion for trial de novo is timely filed after the arbitration decision is served. § 44.103 . . .

H. CHASTAIN C. v. J. CHASTAIN B., 119 So. 3d 547 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . moved for attorney’s fees pursuant to their proposal for settlement which was rejected and section 44.103 . . . parties and that Appellees/Cross-Appellants were entitled to attorney’s fees under sections 768.79 and 44.103 . . . Entitlement to Attorney’s Fees that Appel-lees/Cross-Appellants were also entitled to fees under section 44.103 . . . the trial court should determine the amount owed to Appellees/Cross-Appel-lants pursuant to section 44.103 . . .

S. SALTZMAN, M. D. P. A. v. HADLOCK,, 112 So. 3d 772 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2013)

. . . Saltzman argues that section 44.103(6), Florida Statutes (2002), requires the trial court to award attorney . . . Saltzman subsequently filed a motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to section 44.103(6), which the trial . . . Section 44.103(6), Florida Statutes (2002), provides that “[t]he party having filed for a trial de novo . . . Saltz-man suggests that such an interpretation of section 44.103(6) effectuates the statute’s purpose . . . Section 44.103(6) was amended effective October 1, 2007. . . .

AVATAR PROPERTIES, INC. a a v. GREETHAM, a, 27 So. 3d 764 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . arbitration that the court itself can order pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.820 and section 44.103 . . .

DUNKIN DONUTS FRANCHISED RESTAURANTS, LLC, a v. DONUTS, INC. a, 27 So. 3d 711 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . moved for the imposition of attorney’s fees against Moghaddam and 330545 Donuts, Inc. under section 44.103 . . . the corporate plaintiff, Moghaddam was not a “party” or a “plaintiff’ within the meaning of section 44.103 . . . Statutes authorizing awards of attorney’s fees, such as section 44.103(6), are in derogation of common . . . Its reasoning does not apply to a section 44.103(6) scenario. . . . Section 44.103(6) is directed at the miscalculation of the strength of a case after an arbitration award . . .

W. COOPER, v. MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL, INC. a a, 16 So. 3d 156 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . attorney’s fees incurred during court-ordered, nonbinding arbitration conducted pursuant to section 44.103 . . . The trial court ordered the parties to nonbinding arbitration pursuant to section 44.103, which, in 2004 . . . raising it before agreeing to entitlement, and that a claim for attorney’s fees pursuant to section 44.103 . . . There is certainly no way for a litigant to know in advance whether the fee-shifting provision of 44.103 . . . Just as the Second District found with section 768.79 in Tampa Letter Carriers, section 44.103 seems . . . I would reverse the award of fees under § 44.103(6) for failure to file a pleading in the court case . . . All either party need have done to preserve a right to fees under § 44.103(6) was, upon the entry of . . . the order requiring arbitration under § 44.103(2), promptly file a written notice in the court file of . . .

G. DIAZ, v. ANDY,, 987 So. 2d 698 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . nonbinding arbitration on all issues, including attorney’s fees and costs, in accordance with section 44.103 . . . to Non-Binding Arbitration Award (“Motion for Entry of Judgment”), arguing that pursuant to section 44.103 . . . Section 44.103(2), Florida Statutes (2006), authorizes a court to “refer any contested civil action filed . . . orders and judgments as may be required to carry out the terms of the decision as provided by section 44.103 . . . Section 44.103(5), Florida Statutes (2006), provides in relevant part as follows: The arbitration decision . . .

ANTUNEZ, v. WHITFIELD,, 980 So. 2d 1175 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . Whitfield also moved for the award of attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to section 44.103(6), Florida . . . is this — when considering a prevailing party’s entitlement to attorney’s fees pursuant to section 44.103 . . . However, as of October 1, 2007, section 44.103(6) was amended to read (in applicable part): Upon motion . . . section 44.103(6) relates to procedure or remedies, or instead, is substantive in nature. . . . While he concedes that the intent of section 44.103(6) is to encourage parties to accept the results . . .

CURRENT BUILDERS OF FLORIDA, INC. v. FIRST SEALORD SURETY, INC., 984 So. 2d 526 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . Sealord also moved for fees and costs incurred subsequent to the arbitration award, pursuant to section 44.103 . . . Sealord moved for all fees and costs incurred subsequent to the arbitration award, pursuant to section 44.103 . . .

KALMAN, v. PASCO- HERNANDO SURGICAL ASSOCIATES, P. L., 974 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See § 44.103(5), Fla. Stat. (2005). Ms. . . .

WEDGEWOOD HOLDINGS, INC. a v. WILPON,, 972 So. 2d 1044 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . See § 44.103, Fla. Stat. (2006). . . .

MIDWAY SERVICES, INC. v. CUSTOM MANUFACTURING ENGINEERING, INC., 974 So. 2d 427 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Because the trial court erred in determining that section 44.103(6), Florida Statutes (2005), precludes . . . Case No. 2D07-897 Midway argues that the trial court erred in ruling that section 44.103(6) precludes . . . Section 44.103 addresses court-ordered nonbinding arbitration. . . . Thus, section 44.103(6) provides a vehicle for awarding attorney’s fees against a party who filed for . . . There are no Florida cases discussing the application of section 44.103(6) to an award of attorney’s . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 966 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 2007)

. . . orders and judgments as may be required to carry out the terms of the decision as provided by section 44.103 . . .

MOURNING v. BALLAST NEDAM CONSTRUCTION, INC. a, 964 So. 2d 889 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . an insurance contract dispute was referred to non-binding arbitration under Florida Statutes section 44.103 . . .

MHM SERVICES, INC. v. PERRY,, 958 So. 2d 533 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . In due course the trial court entered an order requiring nonbinding arbitration under section 44.103( . . . Nonbinding arbitration under section 44.103 is meant to be just that — nonbinding. . . .

OCEAN- YACHTS, INC. a v. FLORIDA YACHTS INTERNATIONAL, INC. a, 960 So. 2d 44 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Ortiz, 931 So.2d 1025, 1026 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (“Pursuant to section 44.103(2), Florida Statutes (2005 . . . 259, 260 -261 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (“An arbitrator’s decision in nonbinding arbitration under section 44.103 . . .

LANDING GROUP OF TAMPA, INC. v. R. KIFNER, 951 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Under section 44.103(2), Florida Statutes (2006), a court “may refer any contested civil action filed . . . contempt powers of the court, and for which judgments execution shall issue on request of a party.” § 44.103 . . . still must “enter such orders and judgments as are required to carry out the terms of the decision.” § 44.103 . . . See § 44.103, Fla. Stat. (2006); Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.820. . . .

QUAREGNA v. STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE FUND II, INC. f k a d b a, 943 So. 2d 265 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Section 44.103, Florida Statutes, provides, in pertinent part, 5) The arbitration decision shall be presented . . . shall enter such orders and judgments as are required to carry out the terms of the decision.... § 44.103 . . . orders and judgments as may be required to carry out the terms of the decision as provided by section 44.103 . . .

F. FURIA v. ZICCARELLI,, 935 So. 2d 103 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Ziccarelli noticed the case for trial, the trial court ordered the case to arbitration pursuant to section 44.103 . . . See § 44.103(5), Fla. . . . Section 44.103(5) states that the time limit for filing a request for a trial de novo shall be established . . .

STOWE, v. UNIVERSAL PROPERTY CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,, 937 So. 2d 156 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . motion for trial complies with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.820(h) if it is filed after a section 44.103 . . . parties’ agreement, the trial judge referred the case to non-binding arbitration pursuant to section 44.103 . . . See § 44.103(5), Fla. Stat. (2004); Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.820(h). . . . The legal framework for this case derives from section 44.103 and rule 1.820, which created the procedure . . . Section 44.103(5) states that an “arbitration decision shall be final if a request for a trial de novo . . .

FRIENDLY HOMES OF THE SOUTH INC. a v. FONTICE, 932 So. 2d 634 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Chapter 44, Florida Statutes (2004), authorizes a court to order nonbinding arbitration, § 44.103, and . . . modification, or correction of arbitration award within 90 days after delivery of copy of award); § 44.103 . . .

UNITED AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, v. ORTIZ,, 931 So. 2d 1025 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . Pursuant to section 44.103(2), Florida Statutes (2005), a court “may refer any contested civil action . . . shall enter such orders and judgments as are required to carry out the terms of the decision.... ” § 44.103 . . . Here, the entire case was referred to nonbinding arbitration pursuant to Florida Statutes section 44.103 . . . We find nothing in section 44.103 that restricts the issues the arbitrator may determine during arbitration . . . determined by the arbitrator when a trial court refers a case to nonbinding arbitration pursuant to section 44.103 . . .

T. A. ENTERPRISES, INC. v. OLARTE, INC. a, 931 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . appeal, on remand, the circuit court ordered the parties to non-binding arbitration pursuant to section 44.103 . . .

NICHOLSON- KENNY CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC. v. STEINBERG,, 932 So. 2d 321 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . orders and judgments as may be required to carry out the terms of the decisions as provided by section 44.103 . . .

BUSCEMI, v. CITY OF PLANTATION,, 901 So. 2d 979 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . The trial court referred the case for non-binding arbitration pursuant to section 44.103, Florida Statutes . . . Neither party requested a trial de novo within the twenty days provided by section 44.103(5), Florida . . .

CONNELL, v. CITY OF PLANTATION,, 901 So. 2d 317 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . The court ordered the parties to attend nonbinding arbitration, pursuant to section 44.103, Florida Statutes . . . See § 44.103(5), Fla. Stat. (2003). . . . Section 44.103(5), Florida Statutes, sets forth the duties of a trial court following an arbitrator’s . . . While section 44.103(6) discusses the assessment of fees and costs when the award is challenged, the . . . Nothing in section 44.103 prevents us from doing so. . . .

FRANCIS v. AKERLEY,, 884 So. 2d 455 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Sarkis does not prohibit the use of a contingency risk multiplier in a fee awarded pursuant to section 44.103 . . . The plaintiff maintains section 44.103, unlike section 768.79, contains no specific enumerated factors . . . we hold a court may not apply a contingency risk multiplier when awarding fees, pursuant to section 44.103 . . . However, because the Florida Supreme Court did not address section 44.103 in Sarkis, and we deem this . . . MAY A COURT APPLY A CONTINGENCY RISK MULTIPLIER IN AWARDING ATTORNEYS FEES PURSUANT TO SECTION 44.103 . . .

PATTERSON, v. ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY,, 884 So. 2d 178 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Section 44.103(5), Florida Statutes (2003), states in pertinent part: If no request for trial de novo . . .

BROWARD YACHTS, INC. v. DENISON, 871 So. 2d 954 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . Section 44.103, Florida Statutes (2003), entitled “Court-ordered, nonbinding arbitration,” authorizes . . . If a motion for trial is not filed the trial court “shall” enter a judgment. § 44.103(5), Fla. . . . The entire argument advanced by respondents is that, based on the plain language of section 44.103(5) . . .

MORGAN v. SOUTHEAST SERVICE CORPORATION, d b a, 861 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . entered an order directing all the parties to participate in nonbinding arbitration pursuant to section 44.103 . . . of the defendants, Southeast Service, filed a timely motion-for a trial de novo pursuant to section 44.103 . . . impression as to whether a party who has participated in nonbinding arbitration can limit a séction 44.103 . . . Levine, 736 So.2d 1235 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999): [W]e can find nothing in section 44.103 that requires a trial . . . de novo when reviewing a trial court’s decision relating to a motion for trial pursuant to section 44.103 . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, v. BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC. a a a v. a v., 859 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . Felix then filed a timely motion for jury trial de novo under Florida Statutes section 44.103 (2002) . . . contempt powers of the court, and for which judgments execution shall issue on request of a party.” § 44.103 . . . orders and judgments as may be required to carry out the terms of the decision as provided by section 44.103 . . .

AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE TWO YEAR CYCLE, 858 So. 2d 1013 (Fla. 2003)

. . . judicial circuit shall establish the compensation of arbitrators subject to the limitations in section 44.103 . . . commence and adjourn the arbitration hearing and carry out other such duties as are prescribed by section 44.103 . . . orders and judgments as may be required to carry out the terms of the decision as provided by section 44.103 . . .

BACON FAMILY PARTNERS, L. P. a v. APOLLO CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. a, 852 So. 2d 882 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . trial court ordered the parties in the injunction case to nonbinding arbitration pursuant to section 44.103 . . . court had the authority to refer the injunction case to nonbinding arbitration pursuant to section 44.103 . . . orders and judgments as may be required to carry out the terms of the decision as provided by section 44.103 . . . Association argues that after the conclusion of nonbinding arbitration conducted pursuant to section 44.103 . . . for a trial de novo of an arbitration award in nonbinding arbitration conducted pursuant to section 44.103 . . .

GALLARDO, v. L. SCOTT, M. D., 821 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . novo within twenty days of service of the arbitrators’ decision, that decision, pursuant to section 44.103 . . . Section 44.103, Florida Statutes (1999), entitled “Court-ordered Nonbinding Arbitration,” provides in . . . This case presents two questions: first, whether enactment of section 44.103 and the rule implementing . . . or Rule 1.820 are ignored, the trial de novo deadline of section 44.103(4) alone must inflexibly be . . . Alternative Dispute Resolution. . § 44.103(5), Fla. Stat. (1999). . . . . Whether or not the trial judge was aware of section 44.103 or rule 1.820(h) is irrelevant. . . . court, the arbitrators, or their opponents, that the non-binding arbitration was subject -to section 44.103 . . . I find nothing in section 44.103 or rule 1.820(h) which even remotely suggests that the decision of the . . .

CONTRACTOR S MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS OF NH, INC. a v. ACREE AIR CONDITIONING, INC. a, 799 So. 2d 320 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . Under section 44.103, Florida Statutes (2000), and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.830, a court may . . .

JOHNSON, v. S. LEVINE, M. D. H. M. D. M. D. M. D. M. D. M. M. D. J. M. D. M. M. D. d b a d b a d b a d b a, 736 So. 2d 1235 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . The trial judge ordered the parties to non-binding arbitration under section 44.103, Florida Statutes . . . Plaintiff argues that section 44.103(5) imposes a non-discretionary, mandatory duty to enter judgments . . . [emphasis supplied] We agree with her reading of section 44.103(5). . . . On the merits of the petition, we again refer to the text of section 44.103(5), which in relevant part . . . [emphasis supplied] § 44.103(5), Fla. Stat. (1997). . . .

CENTEX- ROONEY CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. St. v. MARTIN COUNTY,, 725 So. 2d 1255 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . Relying on section 44.103(6), Florida Statutes (1995), the County asserts that Centex was responsible . . . Section 44.103, the non-binding arbitration statute, provides in relevant part that: (6) The party having . . .

MIELE, v. PRUDENTIAL- BACHE SECURITIES, INC., 656 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 1995)

. . . and rules of civil procedure, if an arbitration occurs after a claimant files a lawsuit under section 44.103 . . . See, e.g., §§ 44.103, 44.104, Fla.Stat. (1993); Fla. R.Civ.P. 1.700, et seq., 1.800, et seq. . . .

In FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, FLORIDA RULES FOR CERTIFIED AND COURT- APPOINTED MEDIATORS, AND PROPOSED FLORIDA RULES FOR COURT- APPOINTED ARBITRATORS, 641 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1994)

. . . adjourn the arbitration hearing and carry out other such duties as are prescribed by section 44.303 44.103 . . .

PREFERRED MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, v. J. DAVIS,, 629 So. 2d 259 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . We see no logical reason why in nonbinding arbitration under section 44.103, Florida Statutes, a judgment . . . An arbitrator’s decision in nonbinding arbitration under section 44.103, Florida Statutes, may be “vacated . . .

GOOD SAMARITAN HOSPITAL ASSOCIATION, INC. v. D. ADEIMY, a, 622 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . See § 44.103(4), Fla. Stat. (1991): rule 1.820(h), Fla.R.Civ.P. See also Klein v. J.L. . . .