A recent ruling by the Florida Supreme Court clarified that attorney-fees clauses do not automatically apply to future property owners. The case originated with an easement agreement involving Crown Castle South LLC and RJ’s International Trading LLC. Although RJ’s secured damages for trespass, it sought attorney fees based on the original agreement. The court determined that the legal-fees clause lacked connection to the use or enjoyment of the land. A recent ruling by the Florida Supreme Court clarified that attorney-fees clauses do not automatically apply to future property owners. The case originated with an easement agreement involving Crown Castle South LLC and RJ’s International Trading LLC. Although RJ’s secured damages for trespass, it sought attorney fees based on the original agreement. The court determined that the legal-fees clause lacked connection to the use or enjoyment of the land.
Trending
- Delhi records ‘very poor’ air quality on Diwali, 19 monitoring stations report severe AQI
- Ohio homeowner ordered to pay contractor $45,806 despite cosmetic defects in basement walls
- Trump says US took ‘giant step back in history’ after Democrats’ midterm victory
- PM Modi visits LK Advani on his birthday as veteran BJP leader enters 100th year
- Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa plans faceless anti-terror courts: Report
- Portion of false ceiling collapses outside Mumbai airport terminal 2; 1 injured
- Parents sue UK school for stopping Hindu boy from putting on tilak
- ‘Matter of personal faith’: Congress on Akhilesh Yadav’s proposed Ram Temple visit