642 So. 2d 1126 | Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 1994
Lee County has filed a petition for certio-rari, which we elect to treat as a motion to review a cost order. See Fla.RApp.P. 9.400(c). We reverse the order to the extent that it requires Lee County, a nonparty to this civil action, to pay for an appellate transcript. The fact that the successful appellant may be indigent is not a basis to require a county to pay for a transcript in an ordinary civil action.
Sandra Eaton sued Peter A. Gurry for monetary damages in the circuit court for the Twentieth Judicial Circuit. The action alleged that Ms. Eaton was entitled to recover the value of her services to Mr. Gurry under quantum meruit. The trial court denied the claim after a nonjury trial. This court reversed that judgment in Eaton v. Gurry, 627 So.2d 1317 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).
On remand, Ms. Eaton filed a motion in the circuit court seeking taxation of her appellate costs under rule 9.400(a). Without notice to Lee County, the trial court entered an order requiring it to pay for the cost of the transcript on appeal. Lee County filed a motion to vacate this order, which the trial court granted because of the lack of notice. The trial court concluded, however, that it must require Lee County to pay for this transcript because Ms. Eaton was indigent and was entitled to certain services of the court system without charge under section 57.081(1), Florida Statutes (1993). Thus, it entered a new order compelling Lee County to pay $903.80 to the court reporter for the transcript used in the appeal. Lee County seeks review of this order.
Although an indigent person is entitled to receive some services of the court
The trial court’s reliance on Daniels v. State, 441 So.2d 186 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), is misplaced. That ease involves the cost of transcripts for an indigent defendant’s criminal appeal. Such costs incurred by the public defender’s office are governed by statutes and rules that are not applicable to a typical civil case. See § 27.54(3), Fla.Stat. (1993); Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(d); Shuman v. State, 358 So.2d 1333 (Fla.1978).
Reversed and remanded.