Fifth District Court of Appeal Holds Rowe Findings Must Be Preserved Under Rule 1.530, Affirms Fee Award Against Plaintiff

The plaintiff appealed a final judgment against him that had awarded attorney’s fees to Cape Marine. He argued that the final judgment lacked the required factual findings required under Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So.2d 1145, 1151 (Fla. 1985). Cape Marine argued that because Platt did not file a motion for rehearing under Fla. Rule of Civ. Proc. 1.530 challenging the lack of factual findings, he failed to preserve the issue on appeal.

Rowe lays out certain criteria a trial court must decide in its holding of a fee award. The court in Rowe also held that in determining these criteria, the trial court must set forth specific findings. In Platt, the final judgment contained no express factual findings under Rowe as to the number of hours reasonably expended or a reasonable hourly rate. The Fifth District Court of Appeal noted that Fla. Rule of Civ. Proc. 1.530 requires that “to preserve for appeal a challenge to the failure of the trial court to make required findings of fact in the final judgment, a party must raise that issue in a motion for rehearing under this rule.” In re Amends. to Fla. Rule of Civ. Proc. 1.530 & Fla. Fam. L. Rule of Proce. 12.530, 373 So.3d 1115, 1116 (Fla. 2023).

The court held that Rowe’s required factual findings in attorney’s fees final judgments are “findings of fact” under Rule 1.530, and the court’s prior opinions in Dunson, Merriman, Gilliland and Duke, which all predated the 2023 amendment to Rule 1.530(a), have now been superseded by the amendment. Therefore, since Platt did not file a motion for rehearing, he did not preserve the issue for appeal.