Pineiro v. Law Firm of Franklin & Criscuolo
This text of 976 So. 2d 1146 (Pineiro v. Law Firm of Franklin & Criscuolo) 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.
Opinion
Sandra PINEIRO, Appellant,
v.
LAW FIRM OF FRANKLIN & CRISCUOLO and Rigoberto Pineiro, husband, Appellees.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Hal Vogel, Miami, for appellant.
Barry S. Franklin and Donald G. Criscuolo of Franklin & Criscuolo, North Miami Beach, for appellees.
POLEN, J.
Appellant Sandra E. Pineiro appeals the trial court's orders denying her motion to vacate orders granted in favor of Appellee, Franklin and Criscuolo (F & C), and granting F & C's motions for a charging lien and final money judgment against Pineiro for nonpayment for services rendered. The trial court orally reserved jurisdiction to hold an evidentiary hearing on both parties' section 57.105 claims, but entered a written order reserving jurisdiction only to hear F & C's claims. We affirm the trial court's denial of Pineiro's motion but remand the case to the trial court with instructions to amend the order to reflect its oral ruling reserving jurisdiction to hear both parties' section 57.105 claims. See Romero v. Romero, 916 So.2d 952 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (reverse and remand portions of written order that did not reflect the trial court's oral pronouncements).
STONE and MAY, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
976 So. 2d 1146, 2008 WL 441181, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pineiro-v-law-firm-of-franklin-criscuolo-fladistctapp-2008.