AMAYA LIGHTING & PLASTERING, LLC v. CARLOS ALBERTO ISLA

Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed April 5, 2023.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D22-1933
Lower Tribunal No. 17-14293 CC
________________
Amaya Lighting & Plastering, LLC,
Appellant,
vs.
Carlos Alberto Isla,
Appellee.
An appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Diana
Gonzalez-Whyte, Judge.
Andrew T. Trailor, P.A., and Andrew T. Trailor, for appellant.
Remer, Georges-Pierre & Hoogerwoerd, PLLC, and Anthony M.
Georges-Pierre, for appellee.
Before MILLER, GORDO, and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See O’Neal v. Darling, 321 So. 3d 309, 314 (Fla. 3d DCA
2021) (quoting Swan Landing Dev., LLC v. First Tenn. Bank Nat. Ass’n, 97
So. 3d 326, 328 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)) (“[S]ection 57.105 must be applied with
restraint to ensure that it serves its intended purpose of discouraging
baseless claims without casting ‘a chilling effect on use of the courts.’”);
Minto PBLH, LLC v. 1000 Friends of Fla., Inc., 228 So. 3d 147, 149 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2017) (“Where there is an arguable basis in law and fact for a party’s
claim, a trial court may not sanction that party under section 57.105.”); Cullen
v. Marsh, 34 So. 3d 235, 242 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (“[M]erely losing a case on
the merits is not a basis for a section 57.105 fee award.”); see also Applegate
v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“[T]he
record brought forward by the appellant is inadequate to demonstrate
reversible error.”).
2