PACER TECHNOLOGY v. LEE PHARMACEUTICALS INC (1999)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,Third District.

PACER TECHNOLOGY, Appellant, v. LEE PHARMACEUTICALS, INC., et al., Appellees.

No. 98-1382.

Decided: August 04, 1999

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and GODERICH, JJ.

Kubicki Draper and Elizabeth M. Rodriguez, Miami, for appellant. Marlow, Connell, Valerius, Abrams, Alder & Newman and William G. Edwards, Miami, for appellees.

The third-party defendant, Pacer Technology [Pacer], appeals from a final order denying its motion for attorney's fees pursuant to the offer of judgment statute. § 768.79(7)(a), Fla. Stat. (1993). We reverse finding that the trial court abused its discretion by determining that Pacer's offer was not made in good faith.

A review of the record shows that the third-party plaintiffs presented no evidence that met their burden of proving that Pacer's offer was not made in good faith. See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Manasse, 715 So.2d 1079, 1081-82 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Further, Pacer presented affidavits that supported its position that the offer was, in fact, made in good faith and that the offer bore a reasonable relationship to a realistic assessment of liability. See Manasse, 715 So.2d at 1082; Eagleman v. Eagleman, 673 So.2d 946, 948 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

Reversed and remanded for a determination of the amount of reasonable attorney's fees.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network