From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tremack Co. v. Federal Insurance Com

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 9, 1992
600 So. 2d 38 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

Opinion

No. 91-1539.

June 9, 1992.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County; Stuart M. Simons, Judge.

Dennis G. King, Miami, for appellant.

Shutts Bowen and Kimarie R. Stratos, Miami, for appellee.

Before NESBITT, JORGENSON and COPE, JJ.


ON MOTION FOR REHEARING GRANTED


We affirm a Final Cost Judgment in favor of Federal Insurance Company for court reporters' attendance fees and one-half the cost of transcribing depositions in the aggregate of $4,915.64, because the discovery served the useful purpose of aiding defendants in preparing for trial. Schumacher v. Wellman, 415 So.2d 120, 122 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Miller Yacht Sales, Inc. v. Scott, 311 So.2d 762, 764 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), cert. denied, 328 So.2d 843 (Fla. 1976). Applying the same useful purpose test, we reverse an award of $600 in favor of Federal and Linbeck Construction Company for the services of an expert witness deposed on their behalf some five weeks after summary judgment had been granted in favor of Federal. As a matter of law, the deposition served no useful purpose.

Affirmed here, Tremack v. Federal Ins. Co., 569 So.2d 1355 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part; and remanded.


Summaries of

Tremack Co. v. Federal Insurance Com

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Jun 9, 1992
600 So. 2d 38 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
Case details for

Tremack Co. v. Federal Insurance Com

Case Details

Full title:TREMACK CO., APPELLANT, v. FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Jun 9, 1992

Citations

600 So. 2d 38 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)

Citing Cases

Willey v. M.K. Roark, Inc.

The court held that "reasonably necessary" did not mean the deposition had to be used at trial or quoted to…