Mike Piscitelli of Vezina, Lawrence & Piscitelli in Fort Lauderdale. Photo: J. Albert Diaz/ALM. Mike Piscitelli of Vezina, Lawrence & Piscitelli in Fort Lauderdale. Photo: J. Albert Diaz/ALM.

The Third District Court of Appeal Thursday affirmed a whopping $5 million in attorney fees and $3 million in costs against the Miami-Dade County Expressway Authority.

The decision followed a bench trial that resulted in a bruising $43 million verdict against the government agency for breaching its contract with an electronic tolling company.

Miami-Dade Circuit Judge William Thomas found the expressway authority missed project deadlines and wrongfully terminated a contract with the plaintiff, Electronic Transaction Consultants Corp., which sued in 2012.

The appellate panel reversed on one issue, ordering the trial court to reconsider its award of more than $10 million in prejudgment interest, finding the final judgment didn't properly clarify the date it took effect.

The ruling follows more than seven years of litigation, 200 docket entries, a countercomplaint and two trials. The case restarted in 2017, after the defendant successfully moved to disqualify Miami-Dade Circuit Judge John W. Thornton.

Mike Piscitelli and Bradley Copenhaver of Vezina, Lawrence & Piscitelli's Fort Lauderdale and Tallahassee offices served as lead trial attorneys for the plaintiff. For the appeal, they enlisted former Chief Third DCA Judge Gerald B. Cope Jr. and Lorayne Perez of Akerman in Miami.

Costs were high because of the volume of experts involved, according to Piscitelli, who had to prove not only that the defendant failed to follow an agreed schedule under its contract, but also that his client's performance was legally adequate, despite that interference.

Under the contract, signed in 2009, the plaintiff was responsible for developing and implementing software that met the city's business requirements to help it charge tolls and account for all the money in at least a three-year period.

"This was when MDX was first starting to do Toll-by-Plate," Piscitelli said. "So, taking toll booths off of its highways and making it either SunPass or toll-by-plate."

But when the city stopped keeping up with the schedule about three months in, Piscitelli said his client couldn't pay its employees.

"They went for roughly two years carrying that burden, and this is not a huge company, so it had a tremendous impact," Piscitelli said. "But the company did perform, and the court found that it performed substantially in accord with the contract."

The Miami-Dade County Expressway Authority denied any wrongdoing, and alleged the real problem was the tolling company's poor performance. It claimed it failed to comply with dispute resolution procedures under the contract.

"We decline to adopt MDX's interpretation, which urges us to read certain provisions of sections 14 and 15 out of context, and import a binding dispute resolution requirement that the parties did not expressly provide for in the contract," the opinion said.

Counsel to Miami-Dade County Expressway Authority, Rodolfo Sorondo Jr., Christopher Bellows, Monica Castro and Tiffany Roddenberry of Holland & Knight's Miami and Tallahassee offices did not respond to requests for comment by deadline.

Third DCA Judge Monica Gordo wrote the opinion, with Judges Ivan F. Fernandez and Bronwyn Miller concurring.

The plaintiff is also entitled to appellate attorney fees, but the trial court has yet to rule on the amount.

 

Read the opinion:

More appeals:

Appellate Court Revives Claims That Pop-up Window Blocked Gym Contract's Language

11th Circuit Offers Witty Take on 'The Case of the Polite Bank Robber'