It's bad karma to go after opposing parties just because you won a jurisdictional motion. Salt in the wound and all that.....
You're also not a "prevailing party" under FDUTPA -- don't be a schmuck:
According to the plain language of § 501.2105, Fla. Stat., a party may recover attorney’s fees only after a judgment has been entered. See Diamond Aircraft Indus., Inc. v. Horowitch, 107 So. 3d 362, 368 (Fla. 2013) (“[T]o recover attorney's fees in a FDUTPA action, a party must prevail in the litigation; meaning that the party must receive a favorable judgment from a trial court with regard to the legal action, including the exhaustion of all appeals.”); Black Diamond Props., Inc. v. Haines, 36 So. 3d 819, 821 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010) (“[S]ection 501.2105(1) . . . requires that there be an entryThis is a nice, clear restatement of the law by Judge Rosenbaum, affirming an R&R by Magistrate Judge Hunt, and also is consistent with the broad remedial purposes of FDUTPA.
of judgment before attorney’s fees can be awarded.”). Here, the Court dismissed the Complaint solely on jurisdictional grounds, and it is indisputable that no judgment has been entered in this case. Accordingly, Defendant is not entitled to attorney’s fees under this provision.
She also has a good footnote rejecting a real stretch argument:
Defendant contends that the Order dismissing the Complaint is akin to a “judgment” because it effectively “determine[d] the rights of the parties.” This argument lacks merit. First, the Court made no determination as to the parties’ respective rights; it simply concluded that Plaintiff’s claims must be brought in another forum where jurisdiction over Defendant lies. Moreover, Florida courts have consistently held that in order to recover attorney’s fees under § 501.2105, an actual judgment must be entered as to liability.She's gonna make one hail of an appellate judge.