KENDALL V. U.S. DEVELOPMT

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DISPOSED OF. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA THIRD DISTRICT JANUARY TERM, 2003 KENDALL VILLAGE, INC., etc., et al., Appellant, vs. U.S. DEVELOPMENT, LTD., by and through its general partner, U.S. DEVELOPMENT CORP., Appellee. Opinion filed April 30, 2003. ** ** ** ** ** CASE NO. 3D02-599 LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. 00-16273 ** ** An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Michael A. Genden, Judge. Adorno & Yoss, Jack R. Reiter and Natalie J. Carlos, for appellant. Kathleen M. Weber Raskin, for appellee. Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and GODERICH and GREEN, JJ. PER CURIAM. A review of the record indicates that the plaintiff, U.S. Development, Ltd., by and through its general partner U.S. Development Corp., did not meet its burden of establishing that the offer of judgment made by Jeffrey Berkowitz pursuant to section 768.79, Florida Statutes (2001), was not made in good faith. See Donohoe v. Starmed Staffing, Inc., 743 So. 2d 623, 624 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Pacer Tech. v. Lee Pharms., Inc., 737 So. 2d 1238 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). As such, the trial court abused its discretion by denying Berkowitz s motion for attorney s fees. This cause is remanded with directions to award attorney s fees to Berkowitz. Reversed and remanded with directions. 2

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.