Court Opinion

ID: 4844139
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2021-08-23 15:14:50.419873+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:11:39.124591
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
In light of the reversal of the underlying judgment on which the attorney’s fee order in this appeal is based, Ring Power Corp. v. Condado-Perez, 219 So.3d 1028, 1030 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017), we reverse the order on attorney’s fees. See ARC Foods, Inc. v. MGI Props., 746 So.2d 514, 514 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Siegel v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, 100 So.3d 783, 784 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); S & I Invs. v. Payless Flea Mkt., Inc., 40 So.3d 48, 49 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010).
Reversed.
KHOUZAM, SALARIO, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.