Case Name: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, Appellant, v. A.F., a Child, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1988-07-07
Citations: 528 So. 2d 87
Docket Number: No. 87-1988
Parties: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, Appellant, v. A.F., a Child, Appellee.
Judges: COWART, J., concurs specially with opinion.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 528
Pages: 87–91

Head Matter:
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, Appellant, v. A.F., a Child, Appellee.
No. 87-1988.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
July 7, 1988.
Linda K. Harris, Gainesville, for appellant.
No appearance for appellee.

Opinion:
SHARP, Chief Judge.
The Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services appeals from the trial court's order awarding costs against HRS pursuant to section 57.041, Florida Statutes (1987) in a Chapter 39 proceeding. We affirm.
HRS initiated this proceeding by filing a petition to declare that a child, A.F., was dependent. Private counsel represented A.F.'s parents, and the cause was actively defended. At the closing of HRS's case, the trial court dismissed the petition on the ground that the evidence presented was insufficient to support a finding of dependency.
Counsel for the parents filed a motion for attorney's fees and costs, pursuant to sections 57.105 and 57.041, Florida Statutes (1987), respectively. The trial court denied an award of attorney's fees, but granted costs totalling $583.58. They were itemized as follows in appellee's motion:
Clerk's Praecipes and Subpoenas for six (6) Deponents.$ 24.00
Sheriff's service of six (6) Subpoenas for six (6) Deponents .60.00
Clerk's Praecipe and Subpoena for Dr. Shutze Subpoena .4.00
Sheriff's service of Dr. Shutze Subpoena.10.00
Court Reporter Costs.96.25
Cost of Linda Galloway Praecipe and Subpoena.4.00
Cost of Sheriff's Service of Linda Galloway Subpoena _10.00
Cost of Brian Harrison Praecipe & Subpoena.4.00
Sheriff's Service of Brian Harrison Subpoena.10.00
Cost of taking Deposition of Linda Galloway.106.33
Cost of taking Deposition of Brian Harrison.155.00
Cost of Transcript of Trial on June 4, 1987 .100.00
TOTAL COSTS.. .$583.58
HRS argued that section 57.111, Florida Statutes (The Florida Equal Access to Justice Act of 1984) precludes an award of costs in this case. However, that law merely provides that attorney's fees and costs shall be made under certain circumstances to a prevailing small business party in an adjudicatory or administrative proceeding under Chapter 120, which was initiated by a state agency, unless the agency's actions were justified, or special circumstances make the award unjust. See, e.g., Gentele v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Optometry, 513 So.2d 672 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); City of Naples Airport Authority v. Collier Development Corp., 515 So.2d 1058 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). We do not think this provision impacts the award of costs in a juvenile proceeding.
The Florida Supreme Court held that costs can be taxed against the state and its agencies pursuant to section 57.041. Simpson v. Merrill, 234 So.2d 350 (Fla.1970). The court reasoned that section 57.041:
provides for the recovery of legal costs by the party recovering the judgment in all cases except those specifically exempted. The exemptions in the statutes do not include the state or its agencies and we can find no basis for reading such an exemption into the plain language of the act.
Id., 234 So.2d at 351.
The sole limitation on an award of fees or costs against any party, including HRS, in juvenile proceedings are those provided by section 39.19 and section 39.414, both of which provide:
Court and witness fees.—In all proceedings under this chapter no court fees shall be charged against, and no witness fees shall be allowed to, any party to a petition or any parent or legal custodian or child named in a summons. Other witnesses shall be paid the witness fees fixed by law. (Emphasis added)
This court has upheld an award of costs (as opposed to court fees and witness fees) against HRS, and in favor of a guardian ad litem who was carrying out his responsibility in a juvenile dependency proceeding under Chapter 827. See In the Interest of M.P., 453 So.2d 85 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), review denied, 472 So.2d 732 (Fla.1985); relying on In the Interest of R.W., 409 So.2d 1069 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), review denied, 418 So.2d 1279 (Fla.1982) (also awarding costs to a guardian ad litem under Chapter 827).
Further, in A.Z. v. State, 404 So.2d 386, (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), this court ruled that costs other than court fees or witness fees were recoverable against HRS in a dependency proceeding. A.Z.'s mother sought to tax costs against HRS pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.400(a):
Costs shall be taxed in favor of the prevailing party unless the court orders otherwise. Taxable costs shall include:
(1) fees for filing and service of process;
(2) charges for preparation of the record;
(3) bond premiums; and
(4) other costs permitted by law.
In A.Z., as in this case, it was argued that section 39.414 barred any recovery. We ruled that although some costs allowed by rule 9.400(a) are barred in these cases by section 39.414, other costs, such as charges for preparation of the record, would not be.
We think this case should be decided consistently with A.Z. v. State. Here, the costs allowed against HRS were neither witness fees nor court fees. However, we note an apparent conflict with J.E.R. v. State, 317 So.2d 89 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975) and Division of Family Services Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. M.V.W., 349 So.2d 232 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), although it is not expressly stated in those eases what costs had been assessed.
AFFIRM.
COWART, J., concurs specially with opinion.
ORFINGER, J., concurs in part, dissents in part with opinion.
. 57.041 Costs; recovery from losing party.—
(1) The party recovering judgment shall recover all his legal costs and charges which shall be included in the judgment; but this section does not apply to executors or administrators in actions when they are not liable for costs.
(2) Costs may be collected by execution on the judgment or order assessing costs.