Reiterer v. Monteil, 98 So. 3d 586

Reiterers conveyed the property to Monteil via warranty deed; Montiel had title insurance from Network Title of Florida and underwritten by Attorneys Title Insurance Fund, with two undisclosed Lee County sewer liens.
Montiel sued Network Title, Attorneys Title, and the Reiterers for breach of warranty, damages, and fees; the liens were satisfied by Attorneys Title, which then cross-claimed for payment and fees; Montiel did not seek fees from the title companies.
Montiel moved for summary judgment to recover her attorney’s fees; the purchase/sale contract did not provide prevailing party fees and generally required each party to bear own fees; arbitration was contemplated by the contract.
The trial court denied arbitration for the Reiterers but later referred the fee motion to a general master, who recommended fees against the Reiterers; the trial court adopted this, awarding fees against the Reiterers.
Florida follows the American Rule: fees only if authorized by statute or contract; no such authorization here; the court relied on Gore, Williams, Tibbetts, Needle, and related authorities to permit fee recovery against a covenantor for encumbrances and against third parties.
The court concluded that no Florida case supports recovering covenantee fees in a direct action against the covenantor or in an action against title companies; the fee award was reversed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
May covenantees recover fees from covenantors for breach of the covenant against encumbrances?	Monteil relies on Gore; seeks fees as covenantee.	No authority allows fees in a direct covenantee-vs-covenantor action.	No; Florida does not authorize such direct recovery against the covenantor.
May Montiel recover attorney’s fees incurred in a direct action against the seller for breach of covenants?	Fees incurred defending title and enforcing covenants are recoverable.	Such fees are not recoverable in a direct action against the covenantor.	No; the covenantee may not recover fees in a direct action against the covenantor.
Are fees incurred in actions against title companies recoverable from the covenantor?	Fees against title insurers should be recoverable as defenses to title defects.	Title companies had no adverse third-party interests; exceptions are narrow and not applicable.	No; fee recoveries against covenants limited to third-party encumbrance disputes do not extend to actions against insurers lacking an adverse-interest posture.
Does the American Rule permit any fee recovery in this case?	Exceptions exist for covenantee-vs-covenantor or related encumbrance scenarios.	Florida recognizes only limited exceptions; none apply here.	No; no applicable statutory or contractual authorization or recognized exception exists to permit the fee award.

Gore v. General Properties Corp., 149 Fla. 690, 6 So.2d 837 (Fla. 1942) (measures damages for breach of covenant against encumbrances include costs to remove encumbrance)
Williams v. Azar, 47 So.2d 624, 627 (Fla.1950) (fees in ejectment against third-party to secure possession may be recoverable)
Tibbetts v. Nichols, 578 So.2d 17 (Fla.1st DCA 1991) (covenantee may recover fees in action against third party to defend title)
Needle v. Lowenberg, 421 So.2d 678, 680 (Fla.4th DCA 1982) (allowing buyer’s attorney’s fees from seller where breach of covenant against encumbrances led to defense against third-party action)
B.W.B. Corp. v. Muscare, 349 So.2d 183, 185 (Fla.3d DCA 1977) (attorney’s fees for buyer’s quiet-title action against third party)
Skipper v. McMillan, 349 So.2d 808 (Fla.1st DCA 1977) (arbitration-related fee-claim limits; covenantee direct action not authorized)
Robbins v. McGrath, 955 So.2d 633 (Fla.1st DCA 2007) ("wrongful act doctrine" allowing recovery of fees as damages in certain circumstances)
Northamerican Van Lines, Inc. v. Roper, 429 So.2d 750 (Fla.1st DCA 1983) (illustrates circumstances where fees may be recoverable in litigation involving third parties)
De Pantosa Saenz v. Rigau & Rigau, P.A., 549 So.2d 682 (Fla.2d DCA 1989) (restates wrongful act/fees-in-litigation concept in real property context)
State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Pritcher, 546 So.2d 1060 (Fla.3d DCA 1989) (acknowledges limited exceptions to American Rule)