LAW.coLAW.co

MARATHON LODGE NO 1058 LOYAL ORDER OF MOOSE INC v. PERSL (2024)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.2024-05-29No. Nos. 3D23-0841 & 3D22-1695

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion

In these consolidated appeals, Marathon Lodge No 1058 Loyal Order of Moose, Inc., appellant and plaintiff below, challenges the final judgment of the trial court, claiming that the trial court erred by denying its motion for leave to file an amended complaint that it sought to file a little over a week before trial (3D22-1695); and challenges a final judgment awarding Bohuslava Persl, appellee and defendant below, attorneys’ fees pursuant to a proposal for settlement (3D23-0841). We affirm both orders.

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying appellants motion seeking leave to file an amended complaint. Toscano Condo. Assn v. DDA Engrs, P.A., 274 So. 3d 487, 490 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (“This Court reviews the denial of a motion for leave to amend a pleading for abuse of discretion.”). In Toscano, as here, this Court affirmed the denial of a motion for leave to amend the complaint that the plaintiff had made close to the scheduled date of trial, and recognized the general rule that a liberal granting of amendment decreases as a case progresses to trial. Id.

Without a transcript of the March 27, 2023 evidentiary hearing that the trial court conducted on Persls fee motion, we are unable to discern any reversible error in the amounts awarded by the trial court in its final judgment on attorneys’ fees and costs. Thomas v. Perkins, 723 So. 2d 293, 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.