Shelowitz, Shelowitz, Terrell & Coffey, P.A. v. Peters

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Shelowitz, Shelowitz, Terrell & Coffey, P.A. v. Peters

931 So. 2d 1059, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 11166, 2006 WL 1816228

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 5, 2006·No. No. 4D06-1449·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Former counsel for the wife in an ongoing dissolution of marriage proceeding seeks review of a nonfinal order granting her motion to release discovery papers to her, in spite of her delinquency in paying fees she owes the firm. The firm filed a notice of retaining lien. We grant the petition.

In granting release of the files, the trial court stated that the “firm does not have a contract or a court order granting a retaining lien.” But the firm did have an implied-in-fact contract, even if not written, and did not need a court order to maintain its lien. Andrew Hall & Assocs. v. Ghanem, 679 So.2d 60, 61-62 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

The order on review is capable of causing irreparable harm to the firm’s retaining lien. Rutherford, Mulhall & Wargo, P.A. v. Antidormi, 695 So.2d 1300 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Accordingly, the petition is granted and the order is hereby quashed.

Petition Granted.

POLEN, FARMER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Former counsel for the wife in an ongoing dissolution of marriage proceeding seeks review of a nonfinal order granting her motion to release discovery papers to her, in spite of her delinquency in paying fees she owes the firm. The firm filed a notice of retaining lien. We grant the petition.

In granting release of the files, the trial court stated that the “firm does not have a contract or a court order granting a retaining lien.” But the firm did have an implied-in-fact contract, even if not written, and did not need a court order to maintain its lien. Andrew Hall & Assocs. v. Ghanem, 679 So.2d 60, 61-62 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

The order on review is capable of causing irreparable harm to the firm’s retaining lien. Rutherford, Mulhall & Wargo, P.A. v. Antidormi, 695 So.2d 1300 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Accordingly, the petition is granted and the order is hereby quashed.

Petition Granted.

POLEN, FARMER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

Shelowitz, Shelowitz, Terrell & Coffey, P.A. v. Peters, 931 So. 2d 1059, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 11166, 2006 WL 1816228 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

931 So. 2d 1059 (Shelowitz, Shelowitz, Terrell & Coffey, P.A. v. Peters) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related