According to our case law, the trial court is not precluded from considering the time an expert spent in preparing to testify, but may exercise broad discretion in this regard. See Winter Park Imps., Inc. v. JM Family Enters., Inc., 77 So. 3d 227, 231–32 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011). Thus, we conclude that the trial court acted within its discretion in refusing to tax the expert's preparation time for the deposition and evidentiary hearing.
As the Fifth District put it: "[W]here a party seeking fees and costs has been afforded an evidentiary hearing, it is not entitled to a second bite at the apple to prove its claim." Winter Park Imports, Inc. v. JM Family Enters., Inc., 77 So.3d 227, 231 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011).
However, unlike Deshpande, we do not remand with directions for the trial court to accept the reductions proffered by the insurer’s expert, as there is evidence and testimony proffered by both sides. Cf. 314 So. 3d at 420 (citing Winter Park Imports, Inc. v. JM Fam. Enters., Inc., 77 So. 3d 227, 231 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) ("[A]s a general rule, where a party seeking fees and costs has been afforded an evidentiary hearing, it is not entitled to a second bite at the apple to prove its claim.")).
"[W]here a party seeking fees and costs has been afforded an evidentiary hearing, it is not entitled to a second bite at the apple to prove its claim." Winter Park Imports, Inc. v. JM Family Enters., Inc., 77 So. 3d 227, 231 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011). We note, however, that "the opponent of a fee has the burden of pointing out with specificity which hours should be deducted.
We agree. See Nasser v. Nasser , 975 So.2d 531, 532 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (affirming the denial of costs of depositions where the moving party failed to meet her burden in the trial court to show that the requested costs were reasonably necessary); cf. Winter Park Imps., Inc. v. JM Family Enters., Inc. , 77 So.3d 227, 231–32 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (affirming costs for certain transcripts and depositions where lead counsel testified via affidavit and without objection as to the reasonableness and necessity of the costs). Accordingly, this portion of the cost award must be stricken.
While some of the costs JLM requested were clearly inappropriate, a total denial of costs should not have occurred without an evidentiary hearing. See Winter Park Imports, Inc. v. JM Family Enterps., Inc., 77 So.3d 227, 230 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011) (requiring an evidentiary hearing when the opposing party objects to the requested costs). We reverse and remand for the trial court to afford JLM the opportunity to show at an evidentiary hearing that the requested costs were reasonably necessary to JLM's defense.