BLUEPRINT 2000 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGENCY, a Leon County - City of Tallahassee Intergovernmental Agency, v. THE HEIRS AND BENEFICIARIES OF THE ESTATE OF PRINCE GRIFFIN and All Other Unknown Parties Claiming By, Through, Under and Against the Above-Named Respondents, Whether Said Unknown Parties May Claim an Interest as Spouses, Heirs, Unknown Tenants, Devisees, Grantees, Creditors, Lienors or Other Claimants
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA BLUEPRINT 2000 INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGENCY, a Leon County - City of Tallahassee Intergovernmental Agency, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED CASE NO. 1D11-1119 Appellant, v. THE HEIRS AND BENEFICIARIES OF THE ESTATE OF PRINCE GRIFFIN and All Other Unknown Parties Claiming By, Through, Under and Against the Above-Named Respondents, Whether Said Unknown Parties May Claim an Interest as Spouses, Heirs, Unknown Tenants, Devisees, Grantees, Creditors, Lienors or Other Claimants, Appellees. _____________________________/ Opinion filed January 13, 2012. An appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County. Terry P. Lewis, Judge. Debra Wiggins Schiro, Blueprint 2000 Legal Counsel, George Reynolds, IV, Assistant Blueprint Attorney, Blueprint 2000 Intergovernmental Agency, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Murray M. Wadsworth, Jr., of Gardner, Bist, Wiener, Wadsworth, & Bowden, P.A., Tallahassee; Gwendolyn J. Spencer of The Spencer Law Firm, P.L.C., Tallahassee, for Appellees Ethel Lee Allen, Junius Barber, George Barber, Willa M. Barber, and Ethel Thomas. Harold M. Knowles, Roosevelt Randolph, and Dawn Pompey Whitehurst of Knowles & Randolph, P.A., Tallahasse, for Appellees Dunsen Watson and Maggie Watson. Andrea V. Nelson and Walter Kelly of Nelson Law Firm, PLC, Tallahassee, for Appellees Maebell Watson Knight, Luella Watson Franklin, Gary Watson, Lorenzo L. Sampson, Sammy L. Watson, Bruce L. Watson, Norris L. Watson, Thomas Watson, Nathaniel Watson, and Willie J. Watson. ON MOTION FOR REHEARING OF ORDER DENYING APPELLATE ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS PER CURIAM. In this eminent domain case, Appellees filed motions seeking an award of appellate attorney s fees and costs. We denied the motions. On consideration of Appellees respective motions for rehearing, we now grant the motions and remand this matter for the trial court to determine the appropriate amount of the award. See Seminole County v. Boyle Inv. Co., 724 So. 2d 645, 646 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (holding defendant landowner entitled to appellate attorney s fees and costs where condemning authority appealed fee award and defendant prevailed); Palm Beach County v. Parker, 622 So. 2d 1014 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (holding that section 72.131(2), Florida Statutes, provides for an award of appellate attorney s fees where the issue was the reasonableness of the fee awarded by the trial court). 2 Appellees motions for attorney s fees are GRANTED, and this cause is REMANDED with instructions consistent with this opinion. DAVIS, VAN NORTWICK, and THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
