← INSIGHTS

Here is the bottom line: in Southwest Florida, you no longer always need a paid expert witness or a separate evidentiary hearing to collect attorney's fees from the other side. The Sixth District Court of Appeal threw out a 62-year-old rule in March. But the same decision shows how winners still lose their fees: the bank in that case won its foreclosure and walked away with nothing for its lawyers, because it never filed the time records.

The Old Rule: Hire a Lawyer to Vouch for Your Lawyer

Many Florida contracts and statutes let the winner recover attorney's fees from the loser. Leases, construction contracts, promissory notes, and mortgages usually have a fee clause. Winning the right to fees, however, has never been the end of it. You still have to prove the amount.

Since 1964, Florida's appellate courts required two things before a judge could set that amount. First, an evidentiary hearing. Second, testimony from an outside lawyer, a "fee expert," saying the hours and hourly rates were reasonable. The rule traces to Lyle v. Lyle, 167 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964). Every district court followed it.

In practice, that meant paying a second lawyer to review your first lawyer's bills and testify. It meant another hearing, another round of scheduling, and another delay before you could collect a dime.

What the Sixth DCA Decided

In Ruffenach v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co., No. 6D2023-1482 (Fla. 6th DCA Mar. 20, 2026), the court looked for the source of the old rule and found none. No statute requires a fee expert. No court rule does. The Florida Supreme Court has never held that one is required. Federal courts award fees without experts or hearings every day. The court put it plainly: with respect to the other district courts, "we believe they were wrong."

The court held two things:

• No expert is automatically required. Trial judges hear fee disputes constantly. They know local hourly rates and how long litigation tasks should take. The court treated the judge as the expert.
• No evidentiary hearing is automatically required. If the only fight is whether the rates and hours are reasonable, the judge can decide on the papers.

The court was careful about what it did not hold. A hearing may still be needed when the parties dispute an actual fact, such as whether the case could have settled without a lawsuit. An expert may still be needed when someone asks for a contingency fee multiplier, because that turns on market conditions judges do not see every day. And either side is still free to hire an expert if it thinks one will help.

The Twist: The Winner Still Lost Its Fees

Deutsche Bank won the foreclosure. The appellate court affirmed that. The trial court also awarded the bank its attorney's fees, with no hearing and no expert. Under the new rule, that part was fine.

The problem was simpler. The bank never filed records showing what work its lawyers actually did. Florida courts calculate fees by multiplying reasonable hours by a reasonable rate, the "lodestar" method from Florida Patient's Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985). Without time records, there are no hours to multiply.

So the court struck the fee award. And it refused to send the case back for a second try. The bank had its chance to prove its fees and did not. That is a hard lesson. The procedure got easier. The burden of proof did not.

Where This Applies, and What Comes Next

Ruffenach binds trial courts in the Sixth District. That includes Collier, Lee, and Charlotte counties here in Southwest Florida, plus Hendry, Glades, Polk, Highlands, Hardee, Orange, and Osceola. Everywhere else in Florida, the old expert-and-hearing rule still applies.

The Sixth DCA certified that its decision conflicts with 37 decisions from the other district courts. That gives the Florida Supreme Court a clear path to decide the question statewide. Until it does, the rule depends on where your case is filed. The court also suggested the Supreme Court adopt a rule spelling out what a fee motion and response must contain, including time records attached to the motion.

One more point from a concurring opinion is worth knowing. The Sixth District is a young court, created in 2023. It has said it will not simply follow other district courts when it thinks they got the law wrong. Lawyers practicing here should preserve those arguments in the trial court so the Sixth DCA can decide them on appeal.

What This Means for You

If you expect to recover fees: recovering them should now cost less and take less time in Collier, Lee, and Charlotte. But the paperwork matters more than ever. Your lawyer's time records are the evidence. Ask for detailed, itemized invoices that show what was done, by whom, and how long it took. Keep every invoice you pay.

If you may have to pay the other side's fees: you lose an easy objection. "They had no fee expert" will not win by itself here. Your challenge now has to be specific: which entries are padded, which tasks were unnecessary, which rates are out of line for Naples or Fort Myers. And if the other side never files real time records, Ruffenach says they get nothing.

If you are signing a contract: look at the fee clause before you sign. It decides who pays the lawyers when a deal goes bad. In the Sixth District, that clause just got easier to enforce.

This article is general information, not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. The law in this area may change if the Florida Supreme Court takes up the question. Consult an attorney about your specific situation.

Fighting over who pays the lawyers?

Fee disputes are won on records and specifics. A consultation gets you a straight answer about what you can recover, or what you can challenge.

Request a consultation