Robertson v. Goethel

369 So. 2d 365, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14700
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 20, 1979
DocketNos. 78-768, 78-805
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 369 So. 2d 365 (Robertson v. Goethel) 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
Robertson v. Goethel, 369 So. 2d 365, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14700 (Fla. Ct. App. 1979).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an action by an attorney [Richard Karl Goethel] and an accountant [Benjamin Sardinas] against a former client [Lorna D. Robertson] for monies due and owing for professional services rendered based on a written contract, quantum meruit and an account stated. The trial court entered final summary judgments for the attorney and accountant on the amount due and owing plus interest. The client appeals.

Our review of the record reveals that the final summary judgments were properly entered. All agree, and the undisputed evidence in the record shows, that the client herein engaged and thereafter accepted professional legal and accounting services from the plaintiffs herein which were competently rendered over an extended period of time, that the client paid periodically without protest on various bills sent by the attorney and accountant for such professional services, and that the outstanding [366]*366fees presently due and owing to the attorney and accountant are admittedly reasonable and not excessive. In view of this showing, it is clear that there were only paper issues left to be decided in the cause, that there were no genuine issues of material fact, and that the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment as a matter of law. See Reflex, N. V. v. UMET Trust, 336 So.2d 473, 474-75 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Shafer & Miller v. Miami Heart Institute, Inc., 237 So.2d 310, 311 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970); Kochan v. American Fire & Casualty Co., 200 So.2d 213, 220 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967); Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.510(a), (c).

Affirmed.

HENDRY, J., dissents.

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

Related

Snyder Oceanography Services, Inc. v. Westport Condominium Ass'n
14 Fla. Supp. 2d 122 (Palm Beach County Court, 1985)
MERRILL-STEVENS DRY DOCK COMPANY v. Corniche Express
400 So. 2d 1286 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Betancourt v. Commercial Bank & Trust Co.
391 So. 2d 334 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Rhode, Titchenal, Baumann & Scripter v. Shattuck
619 P.2d 507 (Colorado Court of Appeals, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
369 So. 2d 365, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14700, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robertson-v-goethel-fladistctapp-1979.