Home
Menu
Call attorney Graham Syfert at 904-383-7448
Personal Injury Lawyer
Florida Statute 57.105 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
F.S. 57.105 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:
Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 57.105

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title VI
CIVIL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE
Chapter 57
COURT COSTS
View Entire Chapter
F.S. 57.105
57.105 Attorney’s fee; sanctions for raising unsupported claims or defenses; exceptions; service of motions; damages for delay of litigation.
(1) Upon the court’s initiative or motion of any party, the court shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee, including prejudgment interest, to be paid to the prevailing party in equal amounts by the losing party and the losing party’s attorney on any claim or defense at any time during a civil proceeding or action in which the court finds that the losing party or the losing party’s attorney knew or should have known that a claim or defense when initially presented to the court or at any time before trial:
(a) Was not supported by the material facts necessary to establish the claim or defense; or
(b) Would not be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts.
(2) At any time in any civil proceeding or action in which the moving party proves by a preponderance of the evidence that any action taken by the opposing party, including, but not limited to, the filing of any pleading or part thereof, the assertion of or response to any discovery demand, the assertion of any claim or defense, or the response to any request by any other party, was taken primarily for the purpose of unreasonable delay, the court shall award damages to the moving party for its reasonable expenses incurred in obtaining the order, which may include attorney’s fees, and other loss resulting from the improper delay.
(3) Notwithstanding subsections (1) and (2), monetary sanctions may not be awarded:
(a) Under paragraph (1)(b) if the court determines that the claim or defense was initially presented to the court as a good faith argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establishment of new law, as it applied to the material facts, with a reasonable expectation of success.
(b) Under paragraph (1)(a) or paragraph (1)(b) against the losing party’s attorney if he or she has acted in good faith, based on the representations of his or her client as to the existence of those material facts.
(c) Under paragraph (1)(b) against a represented party.
(d) On the court’s initiative under subsections (1) and (2) unless sanctions are awarded before a voluntary dismissal or settlement of the claims made by or against the party that is, or whose attorneys are, to be sanctioned.
(4) A motion by a party seeking sanctions under this section must be served but may not be filed with or presented to the court unless, within 21 days after service of the motion, the challenged paper, claim, defense, contention, allegation, or denial is not withdrawn or appropriately corrected.
(5) In administrative proceedings under chapter 120, an administrative law judge shall award a reasonable attorney’s fee and damages to be paid to the prevailing party in equal amounts by the losing party and a losing party’s attorney or qualified representative in the same manner and upon the same basis as provided in subsections (1)-(4). Such award shall be a final order subject to judicial review pursuant to s. 120.68. If the losing party is an agency as defined in s. 120.52(1), the award to the prevailing party shall be against and paid by the agency. A voluntary dismissal by a nonprevailing party does not divest the administrative law judge of jurisdiction to make the award described in this subsection.
(6) The provisions of this section are supplemental to other sanctions or remedies available under law or under court rules.
(7) If a contract contains a provision allowing attorney’s fees to a party when he or she is required to take any action to enforce the contract, the court may also allow reasonable attorney’s fees to the other party when that party prevails in any action, whether as plaintiff or defendant, with respect to the contract. This subsection applies to any contract entered into on or after October 1, 1988.
(8) Attorney fees may not be awarded under this section in proceedings for an injunction for protection pursuant to s. 741.30, s. 784.046, or s. 784.0485, unless the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that the petitioner knowingly made a false statement or allegation in the petition or that the respondent knowingly made a false statement or allegation in an asserted defense, with regard to a material matter as defined in s. 837.011(3).
History.s. 1, ch. 78-275; s. 61, ch. 86-160; ss. 1, 2, ch. 88-160; s. 1, ch. 90-300; s. 316, ch. 95-147; s. 4, ch. 99-225; s. 1, ch. 2002-77; s. 9, ch. 2003-94; s. 1, ch. 2010-129; s. 4, ch. 2019-167.

F.S. 57.105 on Google Scholar

F.S. 57.105 on Casetext

Amendments to 57.105


Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 57.105
Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 57.105.



Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases from cite.case.law:

PIER CRUISE EXPERTS, a v. REVELEX CORPORATION, a, 929 F.3d 1334 (11th Cir. 2019)

. . . In particular, Florida Statute § 57.105(7) provides that- [i]f a contract contains a provision allowing . . . Stat. § 57.105(7). . . . The Florida courts have held that § 57.105(7) aims "to even the playing field," which inures to Pier . . . Sadly for Pier 1, Florida courts have also emphasized-in the same breath-that § 57.105(7) doesn't authorize . . .

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC U. S. v. FARAMARZ,, 275 So. 3d 668 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . entitlement to prevailing party attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the reciprocity provision of section 57.105 . . . entitlement to attorney's fees based on a fee provision in the mortgage and the application of section 57.105 . . . attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the mortgage's fee provision and the reciprocity provision of section 57.105 . . . Bank argue that Faramarz is not entitled to an award of attorney's fees and costs under section 57.105 . . .

DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS v. P. PAGE,, 274 So. 3d 1116 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Pursuant to section 57.105(7), Florida Statutes (2017), she argued entitlement to attorney's fees. . . . Under section 57.105(7), "[i]f a contract contains a provision allowing attorney's fees to a party when . . . that party prevails in any action, whether as plaintiff or defendant, with respect to the contract." § 57.105 . . .

ERORENTALS, LLC T A v. W. YU,, 275 So. 3d 746 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . record reflects, and Qofa concedes, that he never sought attorney's fees as a sanction under Section 57.105 . . . importantly, Qofa presents no support for his argument that attorney's fees are warranted under section 57.105 . . .

VALENCIA GOLF AND COUNTRY CLUB HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. v. COMMUNITY RESOURCE SERVICES, INC., 272 So. 3d 850 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . ' motion to tax attorneys' fees and costs, as to entitlement only, pursuant to sections 720.305 and 57.105 . . . The purpose of section 57.105 is to deter misuse of the judicial system and discourage needless litigation . . .

LEVINE, v. STIMMEL,, 272 So. 3d 847 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . attorney's fees for the hours spent litigating the entitlement to fees for an unsuccessful section 57.105 . . . In addition, Appellee moved separately for attorney's fees and costs pursuant to section 57.105, Florida . . . The trial court denied the section 57.105 motion for attorney's fees but granted the section 736.1004 . . . included in her request the time spent litigating the entitlement to fees for the unsuccessful section 57.105 . . . Otherwise, the trial court shall remove the time spent litigating the unsuccessful section 57.105 motion . . .

FILS- AIME, v. ROBERSON,, 273 So. 3d 1112 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Counsel served Roberson with a notice of their intent to file a motion for sanctions pursuant to section 57.105 . . . ANALYSIS An appellate court reviews an order denying a motion for 57.105 sanctions for an abuse of discretion . . . only if the record reflects that no reasonable trial judge could have denied the subject motions for 57.105 . . . See § 57.105(4), Fla. Stat. . . . Section 57.105(1) provides as follows: (1) Upon the court's initiative or motion of any party, the court . . .

P. ALMAZAN, v. In ESTATE OF AGUILERA- VALDEZ, 273 So. 3d 9 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Ultimately, the Estate served via email a section 57.105 motion for sanctions on the purported heir and . . . did not dismiss the action or withdraw the petition during the safe harbor period provided by section 57.105 . . . Caplan , 140 So.3d 686, 688-90 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014) (holding that a section 57.105 sanctions motion was . . . The court nonetheless concluded that sanctions were warranted and imposed section 57.105 sanctions on . . . Petitioners moved for reconsideration, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction to impose section 57.105 . . .

GROSSO a k a L. v. HSBC BANK USA, N. A. AS TRUSTEE OF ACE SECURITIES CORP., 275 So. 3d 642 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Alexander , 190 So.3d 1114, 1117 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016) (holding that a party cannot employ section 57.105 . . . After the voluntary dismissal, Rios moved for fees under both section 57.105(1) and section 57.105(7) . . . The trial court denied fees under section 57.105(1), but granted fees under section 57.105(7). Id. . . . Notably, Judge Scales observed that "[a]s section 57.105(7) plainly requires, to gain the benefit of . . . In our view, in order to avail herself of section 57.105(7)'s reciprocity, Ada Rios, as the prevailing . . . lawsuit provided for costs and expenses if the Note holder was to enforce the Note" and that section 57.105 . . . Section 57.105(7), Florida Statutes, operates to make a unilateral attorney's fees provision in a mortgage . . . In order for a prevailing party to avail itself of section 57.105(7), both the movant and the opponent . . . homeowner were parties to the underlying contract so as to justify attorney's fees pursuant to section 57.105 . . . judicial determination, should allow reliance on the reciprocal attorney's fees provision of section 57.105 . . .

CALATLANTIC GROUP, INC. v. S. DAU, L., 268 So. 3d 265 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . interpretation of the attorney's fees provisions of the Declaration and in its finding that section 57.105 . . . The purpose of section 57.105(7) is "simply to ensure that each party gets what it gives." Fla. . . . The plaintiff argued that the defendants did not trigger section 57.105(7) because they did not seek . . . Florida Statute § 57.105(7) allows a party to invoke mutuality even if they are a "defendant." . . . The language of section 57.105(6), Florida Statutes (2002), is identical to the statute at issue. . . .

BARBEQUE INTEGRATED, INC. v. WIN- DEVELOPMENT, LLC,, 266 So. 3d 1291 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . In Goersch , we addressed whether a motion for sanctions brought pursuant to section 57.105(4), Florida . . .

DEUTSCHE BANK, NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, AS TRUSTEE FOR HOLDERS OF THE BCAP LLC TRUST v. QUINTELA,, 268 So. 3d 156 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . foreclosure in favor of the Bank, Quintela moved for attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to section 57.105 . . . entitled to fees and costs under section 22 of the mortgage and the reciprocity provision of section 57.105 . . . entitlement to attorney's fees and costs based on a provision in the mortgage and the application of section 57.105 . . . Under section 57.105(7), "[i]f a contract contains a provision allowing attorney's fees to a party when . . .

A. PAUL, AS TRUSTEE OF GERALD A. PAUL REVOCABLE TRUST, A. v. AVRAHAMI, 265 So. 3d 634 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . of Appellate Procedure] 9.410(b), parties seeking appellate fees as a sanction pursuant to section 57.105 . . . prefatory clause of rule 9.400(b) -the procedural rule governing fees with a basis other than section 57.105 . . . filing on its own, especially considering the low rate of filing and success of appeals of denials of § 57.105 . . .

F. GEORGE, v. GILBERT, 268 So. 3d 780 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . However, the defendants did not comply with section 57.105(4)'s safe harbor provision. Id. . . . As can be seen from the quote above, our reference in Watson to excusing a section 57.105 procedural . . . We did not hold, and Watson should not be read to hold, that any section 57.105 procedural deficiency . . . That dicta provided, in pertinent part: We ... do not construe [section 57.105 ] to require the trial . . . court to give a separate notice of its intent to entertain a section 57.105 motion on its own initiative . . .

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, v. CHOICE PLUS, LLC,, 263 So. 3d 304 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . jurisdiction to impose sanctions if the case is voluntarily dismissed within the safe harbor period in section 57.105 . . .

DAVIS v. I. BAILYNSON, M. M. P. A., 268 So. 3d 762 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . 57.105(3)(c). . . . may be ordered to pay attorney's fees under section 57.105(3)(c). . . . " version of section 57.105 in the opinion. . . . 57.105(1)(b). . . . We hold that under proper circumstances, section 57.105(3)(c) permits the filing of a section 57.105( . . .

FLOYD, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N. A. BAC LP F K A LP, 262 So. 3d 270 (Fla. App. Ct. 2019)

. . . Appellant argues that she is entitled to attorneys' fees under section 57.105(7), Florida Statutes (2018 . . .

WHEATON, v. WHEATON,, 261 So. 3d 1236 (Fla. 2019)

. . . Likewise, in Matte , the court addressed a motion for sanctions sought pursuant to section 57.105, Florida . . . In doing so, the court found that preliminary service of a motion for sanctions under section 57.105 . . . See § 57.105(4), Fla. Stat. (2018). . . .

RAWSON, v. GULF COAST PROPERTY MANAGEMENT CO. INC., 261 So. 3d 721 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . challenges the trial court's denial of her motion for attorney's fees and costs filed pursuant to section 57.105 . . . moving for summary judgment, sought the imposition of sanctions against Gulf Coast pursuant to section 57.105 . . . A trial court's ruling on a motion for attorney's fees and costs pursuant to section 57.105, Florida . . . Section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2016), provides: Upon the court's initiative or motion of any party . . . See § 57.105(3)(a)-(d), Fla. Stat. (2016). . . .

RODRIGUEZ, v. WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, AS TRUSTEE FOR STANWICH MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST A,, 270 So. 3d 367 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . entitlement to prevailing party attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the loan documents and section 57.105 . . . entitlement to attorney's fees based on a fee provision in the mortgage and the application of section 57.105 . . . that she became the prevailing party for purposes of an award of prevailing party fees under section 57.105 . . . Therefore, Borrower is not precluded from recovering fees based on a provision in the contract and section 57.105 . . . Section 57.105(7)"transforms any such unilateral contractual attorney's fee provision into a reciprocal . . .

HAM, III, v. PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC, v. LLC,, 260 So. 3d 450 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . They also requested reciprocal attorney's fees pursuant to section 57.105(7), Florida Statutes. . . . In Gruenwald , the First Circuit held that section 57.105(7) does not apply in a case in which a creditor . . . Section 57.105(7) provides as follows: If a contract contains a provision allowing attorney's fees to . . . "The purpose behind section 57.105(7) is to provide mutuality of attorney's fees as a remedy in contract . . . The Tylinskis then moved for attorney's fees based on section 57.105(7), arguing that both contracts . . .

PANSKY, v. PANSKY,, 259 So. 3d 872 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . s motion for sanctions under section 57.105(1), Florida Statutes (2015). . . . "A finding that a party is entitled to recover attorney's fees under section 57.105 must be based upon . . .

WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A. AS TRUSTEE, FOR SASCO TRUST, v. MOCCIA C., 258 So. 3d 469 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . party fees pursuant to the fee provision in the mortgage and the reciprocity provisions of section 57.105 . . . moved for attorney's fees pursuant to the prevailing party fee provision in the mortgage and section 57.105 . . . the Bank's arguments and ruled that Borrowers were entitled to fees under the mortgage and section 57.105 . . . holding in Fitzgerald , that "to be entitled to fees pursuant to the reciprocity provision of section 57.105 . . .

MARK W. RICKARD, P. A. d b a LLC d b a s v. NATURE S SLEEP FACTORY DIRECT, LLC, LLC, D., 261 So. 3d 567 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Rickard (d/b/a Law Guard) and Nature's Sleep ("NS") appeal the denial of their section 57.105(1)(b), . . . Pursuant to section 57.105(4), Appellees were informed that they had twenty-one days to withdraw their . . . See § 57.105(3)(c) ("[M]onetary sanctions may not be awarded ... . . . [w]ould not be supported by the application of then-existing law to those material facts." § 57.105(1 . . . which are applicable here, other than 57.105(3)(c), as discussed above). . . .

INTERNATIONAL FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY, a a v. AMERICARIBE- MORIARTY JV, a, 906 F.3d 1329 (11th Cir. 2018)

. . . . § 57.105(7). . . . Stat. § 57.105(7), and principles of surety law. . . . Stat. § 57.105(7). B. . . . Stat. § 57.105(7). . . . Stat. § 57.105 is inapplicable. . . .

ROBERTS v. PNC BANK, N. A., 263 So. 3d 119 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . sanctions against them (fifty percent) and their attorney (fifty percent) in accordance with section 57.105 . . . Appellee, PNC Bank, N.A., served a section 57.105(1) safe harbor notice demanding that defense be withdrawn . . . The trial court held a post-trial hearing on PNC's section 57.105(1) motion and noted that Appellants . . . Accordingly, the trial court found PNC was entitled to section 57.105 sanctions from October 26, 2015 . . . fees, costs, and interest to be awarded to PNC and against Appellants and attorney Saracco as section 57.105 . . .

ALBRITTON, J. v. BARNESS,, 254 So. 3d 1180 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . assessed against them as a sanction pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.410 and section 57.105 . . .

BUSHNELL, v. PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC,, 255 So. 3d 473 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . provides for fees to the creditor in any collection action and the reciprocity provision in section 57.105 . . . ENFORCE A CONTRACT, SUCH THAT THE PREVAILING PARTY IS ENTITLED TO AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES UNDER § 57.105 . . . TO THE CONTRACT" SUCH THAT THE PREVAILING PARTY IS ENTITLED TO AN AWARD OF ATTORNEY'S FEES UNDER § 57.105 . . . Bushnell argues that the trial court erred in interpreting section 57.105(7) to require an "action to . . . In our view, there are two requirements for application of the reciprocity provision in section 57.105 . . .

WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A. v. B. ELKIND, a k a M. LLC,, 254 So. 3d 1153 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . borrower moved for prevailing party attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the loan documents and section 57.105 . . .

MC LIBERTY EXPRESS, INC. P. S. v. ALL POINTS SERVICES, INC., 252 So. 3d 397 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . , and Maria Isabel Martinez (collectively "the appellees"), attorney's fees and costs under section 57.105 . . . The parties were, however, unable to reach an agreement, and thereafter the appellees' section 57.105 . . . "The purpose of section 57.105 is to discourage baseless claims, stonewall defenses and sham appeals . . . Herron, 828 So.2d 414, 417 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (quoting § 57.105, Fla. . . . If that were the case every summary judgment would be followed by a section 57.105 motion. . . .

GOERSCH v. CITY OF SATELLITE BEACH,, 252 So. 3d 309 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . first impression for this Court regarding whether a motion for sanctions served pursuant to section 57.105 . . . Procedurally, it involves a two-step process. § 57.105(4), Fla. Stat. . . . In the case of a section 57.105 motion, the general law controls the timing of the filing. . . . . § 57.105(4), Fla. Stat. . . . Section 57.105 does not specify a method of service. . . . Fla. 2d DCA 2017) (concluding email service requirements of rule 2.516(b)(1) do not apply to section 57.105 . . . There is no notable difference between the language in section 57.105(4), which states, "[a] motion by . . . conclusions in Matte, 140 So.3d at 690 (concluding strict compliance with rule 2.516 applies to section 57.105 . . .

SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, v. C. B. J. A. B. a, 315 F. Supp. 3d 1312 (S.D. Fla. 2018)

. . . Stat. 57.105(5). The ALJ in this case awarded fees under Rule 6A-6.03311(9)(x). . . .

ATKIN, v. L. KANE, M. D., 246 So. 3d 574 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . appeal the trial court's order which determined only entitlement to attorney's fees pursuant to section 57.105 . . .

SAGER, v. HOLGREN,, 250 So. 3d 793 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . awarded Appellee $500.00 attorney's fees based her amended motion for fees brought pursuant to section 57.105 . . . the Florida Supreme Court approved our earlier holding that an award of attorney's fees under section 57.105 . . .

GREEN EMERALD HOMES, LLC, v. RESIDENTIAL CREDIT OPPORTUNITIES TRUST, 256 So. 3d 211 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . prevailing party does not equate to the status of a mortgagor under the mortgage 'so as to trigger section 57.105 . . .

AZALEA TRACE, INC. v. MATOS, 249 So. 3d 699 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . This left the children (and now leaves us) with just one asserted basis for fees: section 57.105(7), . . . Under section 57.105(7), when a contract provides prevailing-party fees for one party, the court may . . . On appeal, Azalea Trace argues that it cannot be liable under section 57.105(7) because it was not a . . . So if we decided in the earlier appeal that the assignment and section 57.105(7) authorized a fee award . . . Co., N.A. , 215 So.3d at 119 ("Because section 57.105(7) shifts the responsibility for attorney's fees . . .

JEDAK CORPORATION d b a s, v. SEABREEZE OFFICE ASSOCIATES, LLC, 248 So. 3d 242 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . shall show cause in writing within five days why sanctions should not be imposed pursuant to section 57.105 . . .

J. DENINO v. ABBATE,, 247 So. 3d 48 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Abbate's counsel with a motion and notice pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2014), asserting . . . The section 57.105(4) statutory notice, sometimes called a safe harbor notice, was sent to Mrs. . . . This action was taken outside the twenty-one-day safe harbor period set forth in section 57.105, and . . . applied the email service requirements of rule 2.516 to service of a motion for purposes of section 57.105 . . . Section 57.105(4) states: "A motion by a party seeking sanctions under this section must be served but . . .

HERNANDEZ a k a v. L. HEIKKA,, 240 So. 3d 33 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . fees and costs pursuant to section 627.428, Florida Statutes (2017) and as a sanction under section 57.105 . . . section 627.428, the error was harmless because the trial court properly awarded fees under section 57.105 . . .

RADOSEVICH, v. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON,, 245 So. 3d 877 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Radosevich moved for trial court attorney's fees and costs as the prevailing party, pursuant to section 57.105 . . . discretion in determining that the property owner was not entitled to attorney's fees under section 57.105 . . . Section 57.105(7) provides: "If a contract contains a provision allowing attorney's fees to a party when . . . Thus, pursuant to section 57.105(7), Radosevich would also be entitled to her attorney's fees in the . . .

IN RE KRAZ, LLC, LLC, v., 582 B.R. 812 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 2018)

. . . Can the Debtor recover the extra $207,454 in fees under section 57.105, Florida Statutes, as the prevailing . . . So the Debtor has moved to recover the extra $207,454 in fees under section 57.105, Florida Statutes, . . . The Debtor argues that section 57.105, Florida Statutes — which the Debtor denominates as the relevant . . . Section 57.105, as far as the Debtor’s cited authorities show, allow a party to seek prevailing party . . . Chambers, 732 So.2d 1141, 1143 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)). . § 57.105(7), Fla. Stat. . Adv. Doc. . . .

HSBC BANK USA, FOR PHH v. MAGUA J., 243 So. 3d 983 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . recognized the following: [T]o be entitled to fees pursuant to the reciprocity provision of section 57.105 . . .

ROBINSON, v. K. ROBINSON,, 248 So. 3d 174 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . buyer's remorse," the trial court should consider imposing sanctions on the former husband under section 57.105 . . .

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, v. L. MARTINS a k a s CTX LLC,, 240 So. 3d 732 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . fees pursuant to the attorneys' fees clause in the mortgage and the reciprocal provision of section 57.105 . . .

KELLY, v. HSBC BANK USA NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,, 240 So. 3d 107 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Miami Beach, Florida; and (3) granting a motion to impose sanctions against him pursuant to section 57.105 . . .

T. MOORE, v. ESTATE OF ALBEE, BY BENZENHAFER, A., 239 So. 3d 192 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Charles Moore appeals the trial court's order denying his motion for attorney's fees under section 57.105 . . . "A trial court's order denying a request for attorney's fees pursuant to section 57.105 is reviewed for . . . Section 57.105, Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent part: (1) Upon the court's initiative or motion . . . At that point, section 57.105(4) provided Flaire Mae's estate and its counsel with a twenty-one-day " . . . and raises an argument that was not raised in the original motion for section 57.105 sanctions, the . . .

MCADAM PROPERTIES, LLC, v. DUNKIN DONUTS FRANCHISING, LLC, 290 F. Supp. 3d 1279 (N.D. Ala. 2018)

. . . . § 57.105. . . .

M. Z. A. Z. a v. CARNIVAL CORPORATION,, 239 So. 3d 756 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . The trial court denied Carnival's motion for sanctions pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes ( . . .

KEY BISCAYNE GATEWAY PARTNERS, LTD. v. VILLAGE COUNCIL FOR VILLAGE OF KEY BISCAYNE,, 240 So. 3d 84 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . Winkleman, Esq.), appeal three orders awarding attorney's fees as a sanction under section 57.105, Florida . . . plan was so unsupported by material facts or then-existing law as to warrant sanctions under section 57.105 . . . (1) if not withdrawn within the 21-day "safe harbor" period specified in section 57.105(4). . . . The trial court reserved ruling on the sanctions and did not enter any findings under section 57.105. . . . Dwyer, 332 So.2d 333, 335 (Fla. 1976). § 57.105(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2016). . . .

SABIDO v. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON f k a JP CWALT, L N. A., 238 So. 3d 867 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . moved for appellate attorney's fees, citing as their basis for entitlement Florida Statute section 57.105 . . .

PNC BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, v. MDTR, LLC C., 243 So. 3d 456 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . argued that as a substituted party in interest, and based on the reciprocity provisions of section 57.105 . . . Section 57.105(7) dictates that this provision would equally apply to the borrower. . . . See § 57.105(7), Fla. Stat. . . . So.3d 1112, 1116 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) ("Only the parties to a contract may avail themselves of section 57.105 . . . See § 57.105(7), Fla. Stat. . . .

ROMAGUERA v. TRUST MORTGAGE, LLC,, 238 So. 3d 394 (Fla. App. Ct. 2018)

. . . were entitled to fees as the prevailing party based on provisions of the note and mortgage and section 57.105 . . . motion for attorney's fees was based on the provisions of the mortgage and note at issue and section 57.105 . . . Section 57.105(7) provides the following: If a contract contains a provision allowing attorney's fees . . . 2013) (concluding that the mortgagor was entitled to prevailing party attorney's fees under section 57.105 . . . But Boxer did not involve the determination of a prevailing party within the meaning of section 57.105 . . .

LOPEZ, v. HALL,, 233 So. 3d 451 (Fla. 2018)

. . . 963 So.2d 297 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007), regarding whether an award of attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105 . . . For the reasons that follow, we approve the First District’s holding that section 57.105 does not prohibit . . . See § 57.105(1). And it is. See H.K. ex rel. Colton v. . . . Because section 57.105’s language plainly states that its provisions apply to “civil proceeding^] or . . . may be applied to section 784.046 actions where all other requirements of section 57.105 are met. . . . ”'§ 57.105(1), Fla. Stat. (2013); see majority op. at 453. . . . Moreover, the incompatibility of the statutory schemes demonstrates that section 57.105 was never intended . . . respondents against whom injunctions for protection are brought to seek attorney’s fees under section 57.105 . . . By concluding that an action for an injunction for protection is a civil action to which section 57.105 . . . Such incompatibility clearly shows that the Legislature never intended for section 57.105 to apply to . . .

WELLS FARGO BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, FOR MORGAN STANLEY ABS CAPITAL MSAC v. BIRD, U. S., 234 So. 3d 833 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2018)

. . . attorney’s fees based on the attorney’s fees provision in paragraph 22 of the mortgage and section 57.105 . . . attorney’s fees under either paragraph 22 of the mortgage or the reciprocity rule found in section 57.105 . . . Red Road Residential, LLC, 197 So.3d 1112, 1115 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016) (“As section 57.105(7) plainly requires . . .

MADL v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A., 244 So. 3d 1134 (Fla. App. Ct. 2017)

. . . prevailing parties, they are entitled to attorney's fees in accordance with the mortgage and section 57.105 . . . "[B]y operation of law, section 57.105(7) bestows on the other party to the contract[-the borrower-]the . . . In order to obtain prevailing party fees pursuant to section 57.105(7), the moving party must prove three . . . Conversely, section 57.105(7) cannot support an award of fees in favor of parties who are strangers to . . . Nor can section 57.105(7) be employed to impose fees on a non-party to the contract. . . .

AUSTIN LAURATO, P. A. v. STATE FARM FLORIDA INSURANCE COMPANY,, 229 So. 3d 911 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Florida Insurance Company (“State Farm”) as a sanction for filing a frivolous complaint under section 57.105 . . . Orders awarding attorney’s fees as a sanction under section 57.105(1) for raising frivolous claims or . . . See § 57.105(3)(a), Fla. Stat. . . . See § 57.105(1), Fla. Stat. . . . There is no authorization in section 57.105 for that outcome. . . . However, I believe that it was an abuse of discretion to grant section 57.105 sanctions in the instant . . . known that her claim “[w]as not supported by material facts necessary to establish [her] claim.” § 57.105 . . . Thus, it was error to impose section 57.105 sanctions. . . . . See § 57.105(3)(a), Fla. Stat. (2012). . . .

MANZARO, v. D ALESSANDRO,, 229 So. 3d 843 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Pursuant to section 57.105(1), Florida Statutes (2016), Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.410(a), . . . See, e.g., § 57.105(1), Fla. Stat.; Sullivan v. Sullivan, 54 So.3d 520, 523 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010). . . .

NOEL, v. JAMES B. NUTTER COMPANY, v., 232 So. 3d 1112 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Henry’s counsel with a motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to the “safe harbor” provision of section 57.105 . . . counterclaims were devoid of legal or factual support, and therefore frivolous, within the meaning of section 57.105 . . . Noel’s counsel with a motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to the “safe harbor” provision of section 57.105 . . . Reversed and remanded for further proceedings. . .Section 57.105, Florida Statutes, provides in relevant . . .

IN RE ESTATE OF X. ASSIMAKOPOULOS, In X. U T A v. M. P. J., 228 So. 3d 709 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Section 57.105(1) provides as follows: Upon the court’s initiative or motion of any party, the court . . . Here again, as noted above, section 57.105(1) provides only for an award of attorney’s fees—not costs . . . Thus, the court’s opinion does not clearly affirm an award of costs under section 57.105(1). . . . Instead, it is unclear in each case whether the costs were imposed under section 57.105(1) or on some . . . “because the entire award could have been made pursuant to section 57.105 alone.” . . .

MINTO PBLH, LLC, v. FRIENDS OF FLORIDA, INC. PBC,, 228 So. 3d 147 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Schutzers, and their counsel, Ralf Brookes, cross-appeal an order sanctioning them pursuant to section 57.105 . . . The standard of review of a trial court’s decision on entitlement to section 57.105(1) attorney’s fees . . . Section 57.105(1), Florida Statutes (2016), states that a court “shall award a reasonable attorney’s . . . Merely losing a case is not a basis for sanctions under section 57.105. Cullen v. . . . Our decision is guided by the need to apply section 57.105 with restraint. . . .

GOODMAN, v. GOODMAN,, 231 So. 3d 574 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Goodman, pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes, for proceeding with the partition action. . . .

KUMAR, v. C. PATEL,, 227 So. 3d 557 (Fla. 2017)

. . . immunity had been found in a criminal case could be subject to an attorney’s fee sanction under section 57.105 . . .

ORTIZ, v. ORTIZ,, 227 So. 3d 730 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . judgment,- it is unclear whether 'the trial court awarded attorney’s fees pursuant to sections 772.11 or 57.105 . . .

M. BENNETT L. v. MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. LLC f k a LLC d b a LF M. GTE, 230 So. 3d 100 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . trial court's order determining the defendants were entitled to attorney’s fees based ■ on section 57.105 . . . We,- therefore, do not address the defendants’ entitlement to section 57.105 fees. . . . .

GIUFFRE, v. J. EDWARDS, G., 226 So. 3d 1034 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . holding a trial court has continuing jurisdiction to resolve a pending motion for sanctions under section 57.105 . . .

CHANDLER, v. KCCS, INC., 224 So. 3d 929 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Joel Chandler appeals from a final order awarding KCCS, Inc., fees pursuant to section 57.105(1), Florida . . .

CHRISTIANA TRUST, A DIVISION OF WILMINGTON SAVINGS FUND SOCIETY, FSB, FOR NORMANDY MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST, SERIES v. RUSHLOW,, 231 So. 3d 558 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . appellee if successful in an action to enforce the mortgage and the reciprocal provision of section 57.105 . . .

PATARO, v. PATARO,, 224 So. 3d 824 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . letter from opposing counsel giving him notice of the former wife’s claim for sanctions under section 57.105 . . .

I. PROVITOLA A. v. L. COMER,, 225 So. 3d 347 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . the trial court order determining that Appellee was entitled to recover attorney’s fees under section 57.105 . . .

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC d b a v. GLASS, N. A., 219 So. 3d 896 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . attorney’s fees and costs based upon a provision in the mortgage and the reciprocity provisions of section 57.105 . . . Here, the Borrower relies upon section 57.105(7),' Florida Statutes (2016), in support of her motion. . . . The plain language of section 57.105(7) has two requirements. First, the party must have prevailed. . . . fees in the first place, there [was] no basis to invoke the compelled mutuality provisions of section 57.105 . . . Simply put, to be entitled to fees pursuant to the reciprocity provision of section 57.105(7), the movant . . .

ISLA BLUE DEVELOPMENT, LLC, v. C. MOORE,, 223 So. 3d 1097 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . the trial court’s final order denying its motion in which it sought attorney fees pursuant to section 57.105 . . . In its order, the trial court denied the motion for section 57.105 fees on both procedural and substantive . . . explain that the trial court erred in applying Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516 to a section 57.105 . . . Section 57.105(4) requires that “[a] motion by a party seeking sanctions under this section must be served . . . Here, it was undisputed that Isla Blue sent its section 57.105 notice by U.S. mail and that the parties . . .

ESTIMABLE, v. PROPHETE,, 219 So. 3d 1001 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . appeals a sanctions order, and argues the trial court erred in sanctioning her pursuant to section 57.105 . . . While the father complied with section 57.105, she argues he failed to comply with the strict requirements . . . The father then moved for sanctions, pursuant to section 57.105, arguing the mother’s petition was frivolous . . . Section 57.105 requires a party filing a motion for sanctions to comply with, the twenty-one-day “safe . . . harbor” provision, and Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.516. § 57.105(4), Fla. . . .

VOLKSWAGEN AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT d b a AG, v. JONES,, 227 So. 3d 150 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Jones opposed the motion and moved for sanctions pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2014); . . . These other documents included her counsel's letters to VWAG pursuant to section 57.105; what purportedly . . .

GONZALEZ v. INTERNATIONAL PARK CONDOMINIUM I ASSOCIATION, INC., 217 So. 3d 1128 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Florida Statutes (2014) (fee award for prevailing party in action to enforce Declaration); and section 57.105 . . . Section 57.105 While it is improbable that the award was based on section 57.105, that third statute . . . An award of fees under section 57.105 requires a determination by the court that “the party or its counsel . . .

A. PAUL, A. A. v. AVRAHAMI, 216 So. 3d 647 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Trust (“Appellants”) appeal the trial court’s denial of their motion for attorney’s fees under section 57.105 . . . Perhaps you should file a 57.105 claim against Judge Barkdull as well. Good luck with that.” . . . Perhaps you should file a 57.105 claim against Judge Barkdull as well. Good luck with that.” . . . See § 57.105(3)(a), Fla. Stat. . . . . See § 57.105(3)(c), Fla. Stat. . . .

BOATRIGHT v. PHILIP MORRIS USA INC. LLC,, 218 So. 3d 962 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . these cases is Matte, where a defendant served a motion for sanctions on plaintiff pursuant to section 57.105 . . . was served on plaintiff by e-mail, but not filed due to the twenty-one-day grace period in section 57.105 . . . of rule 2.516(a)—it simply presumes that preliminary service of a motion for sanctions under section 57.105 . . . Similar to proposals for settlement, motions for sanctions under section 57.105 are not filed in court . . . Compare § 57.105(4), with § 768.79(3), mid Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.442(d). . . .

ZENITH INSURANCE COMPANY, v. METROBANK S. A., 215 So. 3d 135 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . moved to dismiss based on its alleged lien priority, and its counsel threatened sanctions under section 57.105 . . .

IN RE AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA FAMILY LAW RULES OF PROCEDURE, 214 So. 3d 400 (Fla. 2017)

. . . seeking attorneys’ fees, suit money, or costs, if the basis for the request is solely under section 57.105 . . .

BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST COMPANY, N. A. f k a N. A. v. FITZGERALD,, 215 So. 3d 116 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . attorney’s fees to Jill Fitzgerald (“Fitzgerald”) pursuant to the reciprocity provision of section 57.105 . . . the Bank and Fitzgerald that would allow Fitzgerald to invoke the reciprocity provisions of section 57.105 . . . The trial court therefore erred in awarding Fitzgerald attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105(7), . . . Section 57.105(7) provides as follows: (7) If a contract contains a provision allowing attorney’s fees . . . Subsection (2) of section 57.105 was renumbered as (7) in 2003. . . .

WHEATON, v. WHEATON,, 217 So. 3d 125 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . affirming trial court’s denial of a motion for attorney’s fees sought as a sanction pursuant to section 57.105 . . . compliance with rule 2.516, and implicitly recognizing that a motion for attorney’s fees under section 57.105 . . .

INTERNATIONAL FIDELITY INSURANCE COMPANY, a a v. AMERICARIBE- MORIARITY JV, a, 234 F. Supp. 3d 1242 (S.D. Fla. 2017)

. . . basis for Florida courts holding one-sided fee recovery provisions as bilateral stems from Section 57.105 . . . Ann. § 57.105 (emphasis added). . . . Defendant is correct that Tilbury references Section 57.105(6) but it does so without addressing the . . . one sentence that “parties not in privity cannot benefit from the reciprocity provisions of section 57.105 . . . Stat. § 57.105(2),. entitled Gibbs and Fidelity to their attorney’s fees.” . . .

A. SMILACK, v. G. ELIE,, 211 So. 3d 125 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Elie and imposing sanctions under section 57.105(1), Florida Statutes (2013). . . . 1025-26 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (holding that appeal from order granting sanctions pursuant to section 57.105 . . .

PREUDHOMME, v. F. BAILEY, L. D R LLC, a LLC,, 211 So. 3d 127 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Additionally, the former husband sought attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105, Florida Statutes, . . .

SAND LAKE HILLS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. v. C. BUSCH, D. F., 210 So. 3d 706 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Busch, pursuant to sections 57.105(7) and 712.08, Florida Statutes (2015). . . . any action to enforce compliance with its provisions and that the reciprocal provisions of section 57.105 . . . The ARD Case and Section 57.105(7), Florida Statutes. . . . order awarding attorney’s fees to the Busches and against Appellant pursuant to the ARD' and section 57.105 . . .

STATE v. PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF SOUTHWEST AND CENTRAL FLORIDA, INC., 207 So.3d 1032 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . the bank voluntarily dismissed a foreclosure complaint within the safe harbor provision of section 57.105 . . .

BOSWELL, v. SHIRLEY S PERSONAL CARE SERVICES OF OKEECHOBEE, INC. a, 211 So. 3d 210 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . individual defendants based their attorney’s fees motion upon the contract’s fee provision and section 57.105 . . . court found the defendants were entitled to fees as prevailing parties under the contract and section 57.105 . . .

BUCKINGHAM ESTATES HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. v. J. METCALF,, 207 So.3d 966 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Metcalfs pending motion for sanctions under section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2016). . . . proposed motion for attorney’s fees, alleging an entitlement to attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105 . . . A trial court lacks jurisdiction to hear a motion for sanctions under section 57.105 that is filed after . . . 121 So.3d 23, 41-43 (Fla. 2013), the trial court has continuing jurisdiction to consider a section 57.105 . . . the offending pleading within twenty-one days of a defendant’s request for sanctions under section 57.105 . . .

W. OLSON, v. PICKETT DOWNS UNIT IV HOMEOWNER S ASSOCIATION, INC., 205 So. 3d 869 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . the restrictive covenants and section 720.305(1), as well as the reciprocity provisions of section 57.105 . . .

WASH, v. L. FERDINAND, Jr., 206 So.3d 810 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . of an amended order apportioning the fees between Appellant and his counsel as required by section 57.105 . . .

BANK OF AMERICA, N. A. v. TURKANOVIC,, 204 So.3d 595 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . 1.525 and basing the request for sanctions on “the' inherent power of the Court” rather than section 57.105 . . .

JARRETTE BAY INVESTMENTS CORPORATION, v. BANKUNITED, N. A. Jr., 207 So.3d 345 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . served their multi-count complaint on Ban-kUnited, BankUnited served Plaintiffs, pursuant to section 57.105 . . . BankUnited then filed its previously served 57.105 motion. . . . , this Court must also award BankUnited entitlement to appellate fees, pursuant to sections 57.105 and . . . Essentially, BankUnited suggests that section 57.105 is a prevailing party fee statute as contemplated . . . BankUnited identifies section 57.105 as the exclusive, substantive basis for entitlement to appellate . . .

BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, v. POKER RUN ACQUISITIONS, INC., 208 So. 3d 199 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . filed a motion for attorneys’ fees and costs, contending that it was the prevailing party under section 57.105 . . .

INFINITI EMPLOYMENT SOLUTIONS, INC. v. MS LIQUIDATORS OF ARIZONA, LLC,, 204 So.3d 550 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . , in part, denied its two motions for attorney’s .fees .and delay damages filed pursuant to section 57.105 . . . So I don’t think I would find there is a 57.105 issue. . . . A trial court’s order denying a request for attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105 is reviewed for . . . Kennelly, 847 So.2d 1151, 1154 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (citing § 57.105, Fla. . . . “The current version [of section 57.105, Florida Statutes], however, now authorizes an award of fees . . .

L. ZURRO, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N. A., 209 So. 3d 27 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Florida Statutes Section 57.105(7) provides for the reciprocal recovery of attorney fees. . . .

HSBC BANK USA, N. A. v. FRENKEL,, 208 So. 3d 156 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Frenkel Trust was entitled to attorney’s fees based both on the mortgage’s fee provision and on section 57.105 . . . mortgage containing the subject fee provision, it is therefore unable to derive the benefit of section 57.105 . . . fee provision that entitled only the lender to prevailing party fees, by operation of law, section 57.105 . . .

DAVENPORT, v. THOR MOTOR COACH, INC. a, 661 F. App'x 997 (11th Cir. 2016)

. . . . §' 57.105 (West 2016) (requiring the court to award attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party upon finding . . .

H R BLOCK BANK, v. H. PERRY,, 205 So. 3d 776 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . attend mediation and a related amended final judgment for attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to section 57.105 . . . the show cause order was made in bad faith, and a motion for attorney’s fees and costs under section 57.105 . . . The trial court itself, in its order granting sanctions under section 57.105(1), described H & R Block . . . 57.105(7). . . . party securing a dismissal pursuant to rule 1.420(b) is a prevailing party for purposes of section 57.105 . . .

SEQUOIA FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS, INC. v. L. WARREN, Sr., 660 F. App'x 725 (11th Cir. 2016)

. . . . § 57.105(7). . . . The award of attorneys’ fees under § 57.105(7) is mandatory for the prevailing party. . . . attorneys’ fees in enforcing them, the Warrens as the borrowers may receive attorneys’ fees under § 57.105 . . .

ST. PETER, v. OSORIO- KHOR,, 198 So. 3d 941 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . proceeding from the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105 . . . The guardian filed a motion to tax attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105 based on the trial court . . . However, with respect to whether this is a case that’s ripe and appropriate for 57.105 sanctions, I’m . . . I realize and I understand that you complied with the 57.105 statute by giving them 21 days notice of . . . Wendy’s, 865 So.2d at 524 (quoting Visoly, 768 So.2d at 491); see also § 57.105(3)(a), Fla. Stat. . . .

HALL, v. LOPEZ,, 213 So. 3d 1003 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Appellant, Sean Hall, appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion for section 57.105 attorney’ . . . agree with Appellant that the trial court erred in ruling that attorney’s fees pursuant to section 57.105 . . . Following a hearing on the legal issue of whether a court may award attorney’s fees under section 57.105 . . . In its order, the trial court reasoned as follows: Section 57.105 attorney’s fees may be awarded as a . . . Section 57.105, Florida Statutes (2013), provides in pertinent part: (1) Upon the court’s initiative . . .