this motion,” assumes the opposite, however, because it assumes the success of the motion to dismiss. Taking a position that is iriconsistent with an objection to personal jurisdiction has been deemed a waiver of the objection. But a general appearance, if made after a timely objection to personal jurisdiction, does not necessarily waive the objection. So long as a defendant makes timely objection to the court’s exercise of in personam jurisdiction, merely participating in the tri 784 (La.Ct.App.1970) (approving view that a pleading was an appearance because it requested attorney’s fees). Florida decisions have likewise characterized the award of attorney’s fees as affirmative relief. See, e.g., River Road Constr. Co. v. Ring Power Corp., 454 So.2d 38, 41 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984) (<HOLDING>); Scheer v. Scheer, 132 So.2d 456, 457 (Fla. 3d
holding trial court erred in awarding attorneys fees to physicians in absence of any evidence of attorneys fees holding that in absence of prayer for attorneys fees trial court should have excluded a purported agreement to pay attorneys fees because there is ample opportunity for the party seeking affirmative relief to plead his case  in the body of the complaint holding that the party seeking contractual attorneys fees is entitled to a decision on the merits holding that no reason existed to create a uniform national rule in admiralty where the case concerned attorneys fees and whether the contractual provision which provided for attorneys fees should allow a party to recover attorneys fees where it succeeded on all but one minor issue holding prayer for general relief does not support award of attorneys fees