IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
AUTOQUOTES (FLORIDA), INC.,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D23-105
LT Case No. 16-2018-CA-005657
SUSANNAH ALBRIGHT,
AN INDIVIDUAL,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed June 16, 2023
Appeal from the Circuit Court
for Duval County,
Marianne L. Aho, Judge.
Joshua R. La Bouef, Cody L.
Westmoreland and Darren C. Jones,
of Brennan Manna Diamond,
Jacksonville, for Appellant.
John S. Mills, of Bishop & Mills,
PLLC, Jacksonville and Courtney
Brewer and Jonathan A. Martin, of
Bishop & Mills, PLLC, Tallahassee,
for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant appeals the trial court’s omnibus attorney’s fees and costs
order,1 which denied its motion for attorney’s fees and costs and granted
Appellee’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs as to entitlement only. We
affirm the trial court’s denial of Appellant’s motion for attorney’s fees and
costs without further discussion. To the extent Appellant’s appeal challenges
Appellee’s entitlement to attorney’s fees, we dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
While the trial court granted Appellee’s motion as to the entitlement of
her fees and costs, it retained jurisdiction to determine the amount of her
fees and costs. This Court has held that “[a]n award of attorneys’ fees does
not become final, and, therefore, appealable until the amount is set by the
trial court.” Mills v. Martinez, 909 So. 2d 340, 342 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).
Therefore, the trial court’s order is non-final and non-appealable as it relates
to the granting of Appellee’s motion. See also Lasco Enters., Inc. v.
Kohlbrand, 819 So. 2d 821, 827 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (“An order which grants
a party’s motion for cost[s] but reserves jurisdiction to determine the amount
of costs is a non-final, non-appealable order which this court lacks jurisdiction
1
The trial court’s omnibus attorney’s fees and costs order was entered
at the conclusion of litigation between Appellant and Appellee. Both parties
have appealed parts of that litigation in case number 5D23-0063, which has
traveled together with this case.
2
to review.”). As a result, we dismiss this portion of the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction.
AFFIRMED, in part; DISMISSED, in part.
BOATWRIGHT, KILBANE and PRATT, JJ., concur.
3