Case: 10-12931 Date Filed: 03/08/2013 Page: 1 of 3
[DO NOT PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
________________________
No. 10-12931
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 6:06-cv-01703-PCF-KRS
ALAN HOROWITCH,
Plaintiff – Appellee,
versus
DIAMOND AIRCRAFT INDUSTRIES, INC.,
a foreign corporation,
Defendant – Appellant.
________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Florida
_________________________
(March 8, 2013)
Before CARNES, ANDERSON, and FARRIS,* Circuit Judges.
_____________
* Honorable Jerome Farris, United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit, sitting by
designation.
Case: 10-12931 Date Filed: 03/08/2013 Page: 2 of 3
PER CURIAM:
This case returns to us after we certified four questions to the Florida
Supreme Court, two of which related to Florida’s offer of judgment statute, Fla.
Stat. §768.79, and two of which related to the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade
Practices Act (“FDUTPA”), Fla. Stat. § 501.2105. The reader is referred to our
previous certification opinion, Horowitch v. Diamond Aircraft Indus, Inc., 645
F.3d 1254 (11th Cir. 2011).
The Florida Supreme Court, in an opinion dated January 10, 2013, answered
the certified questions. See Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc. v. Horowitch, __ So.3d
__ (Fla. Jan. 10, 2013). Although the Florida Supreme Court held that Diamond
Aircraft was not entitled to any attorneys’ fees pursuant to Florida’s offer of
judgment statute, the Court held that the attorneys’ fee provision under FDUTPA
does apply to the instant litigation for fees incurred up until the time that the
federal district court held that FDUTPA was inapplicable.
Accordingly, this case is remanded to the district court for a determination of
attorneys’ fees to which Diamond Aircraft is entitled pursuant to the opinion of the
Florida Supreme Court.
2
Case: 10-12931 Date Filed: 03/08/2013 Page: 3 of 3
SO ORDERED.1
1
We TRANSFER to the district court Diamond Aircraft’s motion for attorneys’
fees because under the FDUPTA, the trial court is the proper venue for bringing that motion. See
Fla. Stat. §501.1205(2) (“The attorney for the prevailing party shall submit a sworn affidavit of
his or her time spent on the case and his or her costs incurred for all the motions, hearings, and
appeals to the trial judge who presided over the civil case.”); M.G.B. Homes, Inc. v. Ameron
Homes, Inc., 30 F.3d 113, 115 (11th Cir. 1994).
3