Jurisdiction: County Court, Tenth Judicial Circuit, Polk County, Florida
Case No.: 53-2025-SC-005442-A000-BAM2
Date: November 14, 2025
Judge: Allison Kaylor
Case Corner – Pharus Funding, LLC v. Howard
Attorney’s Fees After Voluntary Dismissal, Account Stated Claims, and Reciprocity Under § 57.105(7)
This county court order delivers a clear, practical ruling with outsized implications for consumer debt litigation, particularly cases involving account stated claims, credit card agreements, and voluntary dismissals. The court confirmed that a defendant who prevails through dismissal—even without a merits determination—may recover attorney’s fees when a contract and Florida’s reciprocity statute apply.
Background
Pharus Funding, LLC, as successor in interest to a bank, sued Ayana Howard on a single count for account stated, seeking recovery of alleged credit card debt. The action was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff, and the court entered dismissal in favor of the defendant.
Following dismissal, the defendant timely moved for attorney’s fees and costs as the prevailing party, relying on:
- the attorney’s fees provision in the underlying credit card agreement, and
- section 57.105(7), Florida Statutes, which makes unilateral contractual fee provisions reciprocal.
Plaintiff’s Arguments
The plaintiff opposed fees on two primary grounds:
- Choice-of-Law Argument
The plaintiff argued that the credit card agreement selected South Dakota law, which allegedly does not allow reciprocal attorney’s fees, relying on Giles v. Portfolio Recovery. - No Merits Determination
The plaintiff asserted that because the case was dismissed voluntarily—and allegedly duplicated another action—the defendant could not be considered a prevailing party entitled to fees.
The Court’s Analysis
1. Failure to Plead and Prove Foreign Law
The court rejected the choice-of-law argument outright.
Florida law is unequivocal: a party relying on foreign law must plead and prove it. The plaintiff failed to do so. Although the card agreement was attached to the complaint, it was completely illegible, depriving the defendant of meaningful notice of any alleged South Dakota choice-of-law provision.
More importantly, the plaintiff:
- litigated entirely under Florida law, and
- raised foreign law only after dismissal, in response to the fee motion.
Because foreign law was neither pleaded nor proven, Florida law governed.
2. Reciprocity Under § 57.105(7)
Under Florida Statute § 57.105(7), when a contract provides attorney’s fees to one party, the obligation becomes reciprocal. Once Florida law applied, the defendant—having prevailed—was entitled to fees under the same contractual provision the plaintiff invoked when filing suit.
3. Prevailing Party Status After Voluntary Dismissal
The court also rejected the argument that a lack of merits determination bars fees.
Florida courts consistently hold that prevailing party status does not depend on a ruling on the merits when a statute authorizes fees. A voluntary dismissal still renders the defendant the prevailing party.
The court emphasized that:
- statutory fee provisions apply regardless of how the case ends, and
- plaintiffs cannot avoid fee exposure by dismissing claims after forcing defendants to incur legal costs.
Holding
The court granted the defendant’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs, holding that:
- Florida law applied due to the plaintiff’s failure to plead and prove foreign law;
- the contractual fee provision became reciprocal under § 57.105(7); and
- a voluntary dismissal does not preclude a fee award to the prevailing party.
Why This Case Matters
- Debt buyers and creditors must plead foreign law if they intend to rely on it—attaching an illegible contract is not enough.
- Voluntary dismissal is not a shield against attorney’s fee exposure.
- Defendants in account stated and credit card cases have meaningful fee-recovery rights under Florida law.
- Courts will not reward procedural shortcuts or post-dismissal strategy shifts.
This decision reinforces an important litigation reality: if you sue under a contract with a fee provision in Florida, you risk paying fees—even if you walk away.
Today’s Insight
“Justice delayed is justice denied, but justice denied by technical gamesmanship is justice betrayed.”