321 (quoting Humane Soc’y of Broward Cty., Inc. v. Fla. Humane Soc’y, 951 So. 2d 966, 971 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)). A trial court’s determination of discretionary attorneys’ fees will be upheld as long as the award is supported by competent substantial evidence. See Forte, 335 So. 3d at 321. Defending FDUTPA claims may be stressful for product suppliers considering that a successful FDUTPA claim tried to verdict can damage product reputation, impact revenue streams, and is typically not covered by insurance. It is absolutely necessary when faced with an FDUTPA claim to engage an experienced construction lawyer. A well-thought-out defense must start immediately, including asserting the appropriate arguments at a motion to dismiss, attacking the lack of actual damages, triggering the safe harbor provision, and moving to require the plaintiff to post a bond to reasonably indemnify the defendant for damages incurred. Once the plaintiff dismisses the FDUTPA claim, the successful defendant may be entitled to cost and reasonable attorneys’ fees from the non-prevailing plaintiff. The tips set forth are a snapshot of the effective tools that can be used in defending a construction-based FDUTPA claim.
If you have any questions or concerns or have a claim you need assistance with, please contact KD’s Construction Practice Group at: construction@kubickidraper.com.