Gisleda Ramos, D.D.S., P.A., et al. v. Orthodontic Centers of Florida, Inc.
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2005 GISLEDA RAMOS, D.D.S., P.A. and GISLEDA RAMOS, individually, Appellants, v. ORTHODONTIC CENTERS OF FLORIDA, INC., Appellee. CASE NO. 4D04-3510 Ramos argues that, because the motion for fees was not filed within thirty days after she voluntarily dismissed her counterclaim, the trial court erred in granting the motion for fees. The trial court reje cted that argument, concluding that the thirty-day period does not apply where, under rule 1.420(d), the successful party in the prior action is seeking a stay of a second action based on the same claim until the costs are paid for the first action. The p roblem with the trial court s reasoning is that it is directly contrary to the plain wording of rule 1.525. Melton Mgmt., Inc. v. Krott-Shaughnessy, 872 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (applying rule 1.525 to rule 1.420(d)). Reversed. Opinion filed February 16, 2005 POLEN, KLEIN and GROSS, JJ,. concur. Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Cory J. Ciklin, Judge; L.T. Case No. 03CA007198 AO. NOT FINAL UNTIL DISPOSITION OF ANY TIMELY FILED MOTION FOR REHEARING. Susan E. Trench of Goldstein, Tanen & Trench, P.A., Miami, for appellants. Gary E. Lehman of Broad and Cassel, Miami, and Kimberley A. Robbins and Aaron W. Proulx of Broad and Cassel, Tampa, for appellee. PER CURIAM. Gisleda Ramos petitions for a writ of certiorari seeking review of a trial court order that awarded attorney s fees and costs to respondent, Orthodontic Centers of Florida. The order was entered after Ramos had voluntarily dismissed a counterclaim. This is a final order, Caufield v. Cantele , 837 So. 2d 371 (Fla. 2002), and we accordingly treat this as a plenary appeal. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.525 provides, Any party seeking a judgment taxing costs, attorneys' fees, or both shall serve a motion within thirty days after filing of the judgment, including a judgment of dismissal, or the service of a notice of voluntary dismissal.
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.
