Case ID: so2d_490/html/0210-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

FLEA MARKET, U.S.A., INC., Appellant, v. Adolf COHEN and Marlene Cohen, his wife, d/b/a Coheny Island, Appellees.
    No. 86-16.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    June 24, 1986.
    Wilbur G. Silverman, Bay Harbor Islands, for appellant.
    Burnstein & Knee and Jerrold Knee, Hollywood, for appellees.
    Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HUB-BART and JORGENSON, JJ.
   SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.

We find no abuse of discretion in the order under review, which conditioned granting the appellant’s eve-of-trial motion for continuance upon the payment of the appellees’ attorney’s fees caused by the delay. Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Suit, 153 Fla. 490, 15 So.2d 33 (1943); 11 Fla.Jur.2d Continuances § 40 (1979); Annot., Continuance of Civil Case as Conditioned upon Applicant’s Payment of Costs or Expenses Incurred by Other Party, 9 A.L.R. 4th 1144, 1163-66 (1981); compare Speight v. City of Fort Walton Beach, 180 So.2d 385 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965) (condition invalid when party entitled to continuance as a matter of right). Moreover, because the appellant accepted the continuance without objection, the basic rule which forbids a party from appealing from the adverse portion of an order after accepting its benefits, 3 Fla.Jur.2d Appellate Review § 21 (1978), precludes the present attempt to reverse the fee award. 11 Fla.Jur.2d Continuances § 40 (1979) (“In accepting the continuance, the applicant thereby assents to the terms or conditions imposed and must comply with them.”).

Affirmed.