Can I Make the Other Side Pay My Attorney’s Fees in Florida?

“Will the other side have to pay my attorney’s fees?” It is one of the first questions every business client asks — and in Florida, the honest answer is: only if you can point to a specific legal hook. Florida follows the “American Rule”: each side pays its own lawyers, win or lose, unless a contract, a statute, or a rule of procedure says otherwise. The good news is that Florida law offers more of those hooks than most business owners realize. This guide walks through every major path to fee recovery — and the two threshold rules that decide whether you can use any of them.

Rule One: If You Want Fees, Plead for Them

Florida’s Supreme Court has held that a claim for attorney’s fees, whether based on a contract or a statute, must be pleaded — and that failure to plead it waives the claim. Stockman v. Downs, 573 So. 2d 835 (Fla. 1991). That means the time to think about fee recovery is when the complaint or answer is drafted, not when the case is won. A boilerplate demand is not strategy; your pleading should identify the contractual provision or statute that entitles you to fees.

Rule Two: Win, Then Move Fast — the 30-Day Deadline

Entitlement is only half the battle; timing is the other half. Under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.525, a party seeking fees or costs must serve its motion no later than 30 days after the filing of the judgment — including a judgment of dismissal or the service of a notice of voluntary dismissal. The rule replaced the older, forgiving “reasonable time” standard with a hard deadline, and courts enforce it. Win the case, calendar the deadline, and file.

Path 1: Your Contract’s Prevailing-Party Clause

The most common fee hook in business litigation is contractual: a clause awarding fees to the prevailing party in any dispute over the agreement. Florida courts enforce these as written. And if the clause was drafted one-sided — protecting only the other party — Florida law levels the field: under Fla. Stat. § 57.105(7), a contract provision allowing fees to one party permits the court to award fees to the other party when it prevails. The Florida Supreme Court applied exactly that rule in Ham v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, 308 So. 3d 942 (Fla. 2020), holding that a unilateral fee provision in a credit card contract became reciprocal for a debtor who prevailed. The lesson cuts both ways: fee clauses are powerful, so they should be drafted deliberately — because you may end up on either side of one.

Path 2: Fee-Shifting Statutes

Dozens of Florida statutes award fees to a prevailing party. Three matter most in business disputes:

• Frivolous claims and defenses — Fla. Stat. § 57.105. The court may sanction a party (and its lawyer) who pursues a claim or defense they knew or should have known was baseless — with fees awarded in equal amounts against the losing party and counsel. The statute has strict procedural requirements, including a 21-day safe harbor; our guide to frivolous-lawsuit sanctions covers it step by step.
• Deceptive and unfair trade practices — FDUTPA. A consumer or business that suffers a loss from a deceptive or unfair practice may recover actual damages plus attorney’s fees and costs. Fla. Stat. §§ 501.211(2), 501.2105.
• Civil theft — Fla. Stat. § 772.11. A successful civil theft claimant recovers treble damages and reasonable attorney’s fees — though the statute demands clear and convincing proof and a 30-day pre-suit written demand. Fee exposure runs both ways: a claim raised without substantial factual or legal support can cost the claimant the defendant’s fees.

These are the headliners, but the list runs on — from Florida’s construction lien law to landlord-tenant and securities statutes. Whatever your dispute, have litigation counsel check the statutory landscape before assuming fees are off the table. For the underlying claims themselves, see our overview of Florida business torts.

Path 3: Proposals for Settlement — Florida’s Fee-Shifting Wildcard

Even in a good-faith dispute with no fee clause and no fee statute, Florida’s offer-of-judgment framework can shift fees. Under Fla. Stat. § 768.79 and Rule 1.442, a defendant who serves a proposal for settlement that is rejected becomes entitled to its fees from the date of the offer if the case ends in no liability or a judgment at least 25 percent below the offer. A plaintiff who serves a demand and recovers at least 25 percent more is likewise entitled. The mechanics are exacting: a proposal generally may be served no earlier than 90 days into the case and no later than 45 days before trial, and it is deemed rejected unless accepted in writing within 30 days.

Two warnings. First, the Florida Supreme Court requires strict construction of both the statute and the rule — technical defects routinely void otherwise-valid proposals. Willis Shaw Express, Inc. v. Hilyer Sod, Inc., 849 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 2003). Second, Rule 1.442 was amended effective January 1, 2026: among other changes, a proposal must now expressly state whether it includes attorney’s fees and whether fees are part of the legal claim, oral communications cannot constitute acceptance or rejection, and courts weigh enumerated good-faith factors when deciding whether to disallow an award. Proposals recycled from pre-2026 forms are a fee-shifting opportunity wasted — or worse, a malpractice claim waiting.

Path 4: The Court’s Inherent Authority

Finally, even without a contract or statute, Florida courts possess inherent authority to assess attorney’s fees against counsel for bad-faith conduct in litigation. The power is reserved for egregious cases and comes with due-process guardrails — express findings of bad faith, notice, and an opportunity to be heard — but it exists, and it is used. Moakley v. Smallwood, 826 So. 2d 221 (Fla. 2002).

How Much? The Lodestar Method

Whichever path creates entitlement, Florida courts calculate the amount the same way: the “lodestar” — a reasonable number of hours reasonably expended, multiplied by a reasonable hourly rate — established in Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla. 1985). In certain contingency-fee cases, courts may apply a risk multiplier under Standard Guaranty Insurance Co. v. Quanstrom, 555 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 1990). The burden falls on the party seeking fees, which makes contemporaneous, detailed time records indispensable — a discipline that starts on day one of the engagement, not the eve of the fee hearing.

The Fee-Recovery Playbook

• Plead your fee entitlement — contract and statute — in your first responsive pleading or complaint.
• Calendar Rule 1.525’s 30-day post-judgment deadline the moment judgment enters.
• Evaluate a proposal for settlement early; served at the right moment, it changes the economics of the whole case.
• Use § 57.105 safe-harbor letters to force the other side to abandon baseless claims — or pay for them.
• Keep meticulous time records from day one.

To learn more or speak with a knowledgeable Florida Business Attorney, contact Capital Partners Law today:

• Toll-free at (833) 7-CAPLAW
• Complete a New Client Intake Form (No obligation – an attorney will review your information and contact you to discuss your needs).
• Schedule a Free Consultation

This article is provided by Capital Partners Law for informational purposes only. It is not intended as legal advice and does not form the basis for an attorney-client relationship. If you need legal advice, please contact Capital Partners Law or another licensed attorney.

Related practice area: Commercial Litigation — Capital Partners Law