Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
TA ENTERPRISES, INC. v. Olarte, Inc.
Citations: 951 So. 2d 978; 2007 WL 750614Docket: 4D05-829, 4D05-3052
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; March 14, 2007; Florida; State Appellate Court
In the case T.A. Enterprises, Inc. v. Olarte, Inc., the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, reviewed a Lemon Law claim involving a custom van. Olarte, Inc. filed the claim against T.A. Enterprises, which defaulted in response to a decision by the Florida New Motor Vehicle Arbitration Board favoring Olarte. T.A. subsequently sought a trial de novo after the Board’s decision. Upon remand, the trial court ordered non-binding arbitration, which upheld the Board's decision. T.A. then requested another trial de novo, where evidence was presented regarding the vehicle's defects but no testimony on damages was provided. The trial court determined the vehicle was a lemon and adopted the Board's award, leading T.A. to file a motion for reconsideration due to the lack of evidence on damages. The court reaffirmed its judgment but reserved jurisdiction on attorney's fees. T.A. appealed both the damages and attorney's fee awards. The appellate court found that the trial court erred by awarding damages without evidence of "dollars and cents," citing precedent that requires such evidence in appeals from Arbitration Board decisions. The court also ruled out a new trial for damages, stating that it would unfairly allow Olarte another chance to prove damages. Furthermore, the court reversed the award of attorney's fees, noting that Olarte did not plead entitlement to fees, which constitutes a waiver of the claim per Florida Supreme Court precedent. The court ultimately reversed the trial court's judgment on both damages and attorney's fees and remanded the case for further proceedings. Judges Warner and Gross concurred with the decision.