Heinrich Gordon Batchelder Hargrove Weihe & Gent v. Kapner

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Heinrich Gordon Batchelder Hargrove Weihe & Gent v. Kapner

605 So. 2d 1319, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 10608, 1992 WL 280367

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 14, 1992

DocketNo. 92-1898

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 605 So. 2d 1319 (Heinrich Gordon Batchelder Hargrove Weihe & Gent v. Kapner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Heinrich Gordon Batchelder Hargrove Weihe & Gent v. Kapner, 605 So. 2d 1319, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 10608, 1992 WL 280367 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioners seek certiorari review of a trial court’s interlocutory order requiring the petitioner law firm to produce billing records pertaining to other clients in a proceeding for enforcement of an attorney’s charging lien. The petitioner law firm has been retained only to handle the attorney lien proceeding and has not represented the client with regard to her dissolution of marriage. The order at issue, however, compelled production of billing records for all family law, dissolution or domestic relation cases handled by the assigned attorney.

We grant the petition for writ of certio-rari and quash the discovery order because it requires production of privileged and irrelevant materials. Old Holdings, Ltd. v. Taplin, Howard, Shaw & Miller, P.A., 584 So.2d 1128 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Wooten, Honeywell & Kest, P.A. v. Posner, 556 So.2d 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).

CERTIORARI GRANTED.

DOWNEY, GUNTHER and WARNER, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Petitioners seek certiorari review of a trial court’s interlocutory order requiring the petitioner law firm to produce billing records pertaining to other clients in a proceeding for enforcement of an attorney’s charging lien. The petitioner law firm has been retained only to handle the attorney lien proceeding and has not represented the client with regard to her dissolution of marriage. The order at issue, however, compelled production of billing records for all family law, dissolution or domestic relation cases handled by the assigned attorney.

We grant the petition for writ of certio-rari and quash the discovery order because it requires production of privileged and irrelevant materials. Old Holdings, Ltd. v. Taplin, Howard, Shaw & Miller, P.A., 584 So.2d 1128 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Wooten, Honeywell & Kest, P.A. v. Posner, 556 So.2d 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).

CERTIORARI GRANTED.

DOWNEY, GUNTHER and WARNER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

605 So. 2d 1319, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 10608, 1992 WL 280367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heinrich-gordon-batchelder-hargrove-weihe-gent-v-kapner-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack