MOTION FOR REVIEW OF AWARD OF ATTORNEY’S FEES AND COSTS BENTON, C.J. Appellant’s motion for review of award of attorney’s fees and costs is granted in part. The circuit court shall reduce the award against Kevin S. Sanders by any amount attributable to any litigation other than the proceedings in this court that eventuated in the denial of the motion for rehearing (filed on December 15, 2009) by order entered March 25, 2010. In the absence of even a motion for attorney’s fees in the supreme court, there is no basis for an award of attorney’s fees incurred in proceedings in the supreme court. See Milanick v. Osborne, 6 So.3d 729, 731 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (<HOLDING>); Respiratory Care Servs., Inc. v. Murray D.
holding that fees incurred by debtor were not in the nature of support holding osborne not entitled to attorneys fees incurred defending against milanicks attempt to obtain discretionary review of the fifth districts opinion in the supreme court where osborne did not request an award of fees incurred with respect to the supreme court proceedings holding that by choosing the words any actual expenses including attorneys fees incurred congress did not intend to remove the discretion of the district court to award fees in cases such as contingent fee or pro bono cases where the client has not actually incurred the obligation to pay her attorneys fees holding that indemnitee may recover attorneys fees incurred in defending indemnity agreement holding that an award of attorneys fees under supreme court rule 38 precursor to rule 222 did not preempt an award of attorneys fees to which one is otherwise entitled and thus appellant could seek an award of attorneys fees pursuant to section 1577300 which permits an award of fees for a party prevailing in an action against a state agency