Goldman v. Estate of Goldman
166 So. 3d 927
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2015Background
- In 2007 Attorney Liz Consuegra served as court-appointed guardian ad litem for Aaron Goldman and received a confidential guardianship file containing financial and medical records; she signed a confidentiality stipulation.
- The trial court declared the guardianship file confidential in March 2008.
- In September 2010 Consuegra inadvertently sent the confidential file to Paul Cowan, new counsel for Richard Goldman; Cowan issued subpoenas to financial institutions and sought court permission to review the confidential file.
- Jonathan Lewin moved for sanctions, alleging the appellants obtained and used confidential material in violation of the court’s confidentiality order.
- The trial court found the disclosure was inadvertent (not in bad faith) but nevertheless imposed sanctions (attorney’s fees and costs) on the appellants without making express findings of bad faith as to the parties or attorneys.
- Appellants appealed, arguing the court abused its discretion by awarding fees under its inherent authority without the required express bad-faith findings; the appellate court reversed and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a trial court may award attorney’s fees under its inherent authority without an express finding of bad faith | Lewin: Moakley’s bad-faith finding requirement applies only when fees are assessed against counsel, not parties | Appellants: Moakley requires express findings of bad faith and detailed factual support for any inherent-authority fee award against parties or counsel | Reversed: Moakley’s procedures apply equally to parties; trial court abused discretion by awarding fees without express bad-faith findings and detailed factual findings |
Key Cases Cited
- Moakley v. Smallwood, 826 So. 2d 221 (Fla. 2002) (trial court’s inherent authority to impose attorney’s fees requires express bad-faith findings and detailed factual support)
- Boca Burger, Inc. v. Forum, 912 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 2005) (appellate standard: review of sanctions for abuse of discretion)
- T/F Systems, Inc. v. Malt, 814 So. 2d 511 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) (Moakley procedures applicable to fee awards against parties as well as attorneys)