Yarbrough v. Abe Rosenberg, P.A.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Yarbrough v. Abe Rosenberg, P.A.

565 So. 2d 363, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5380, 1990 WL 102712

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 25, 1990

DocketNo. 90-0275

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 565 So. 2d 363 (Yarbrough v. Abe Rosenberg, P.A.) 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

Yarbrough v. Abe Rosenberg, P.A., 565 So. 2d 363, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5380, 1990 WL 102712 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

FASTRACK APPEAL

LETTS, Judge.

An attorney successfully sued a client for an unpaid fee for services rendered in a dissolution proceeding, and as part of the final judgment was granted not only a money judgment, but also a charging lien on her real estate. We reverse.

We have virtually no record in this case other than the written fee agreement between the attorney and client. That document required a non-refundable retainer and payment at an hourly rate. There was no express understanding in the fee agreement that the payment was either dependent upon recovery in the dissolution or would arise from it. Moreover, we have no record from which we can deduce that any such understanding was implied. As a consequence, the imposition of a charging lien, based on the record before this court, was directly contrary to our supreme court’s holding in Sinclair, Louis, Siegel, Heath, Nussbaum & Zavertnik v. Baucom, 428 So.2d 1383 (Fla.1983).

Accordingly, we reverse in part and direct the trial court to amend the final judgment by removing all reference to the imposition of a charging or equitable lien. In all other respects, the final judgment is affirmed.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

DELL, J., and FRANK, RICHARD H., Associate Judge, concur.

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

FASTRACK APPEAL

LETTS, Judge.

An attorney successfully sued a client for an unpaid fee for services rendered in a dissolution proceeding, and as part of the final judgment was granted not only a money judgment, but also a charging lien on her real estate. We reverse.

We have virtually no record in this case other than the written fee agreement between the attorney and client. That document required a non-refundable retainer and payment at an hourly rate. There was no express understanding in the fee agreement that the payment was either dependent upon recovery in the dissolution or would arise from it. Moreover, we have no record from which we can deduce that any such understanding was implied. As a consequence, the imposition of a charging lien, based on the record before this court, was directly contrary to our supreme court’s holding in Sinclair, Louis, Siegel, Heath, Nussbaum & Zavertnik v. Baucom, 428 So.2d 1383 (Fla.1983).

Accordingly, we reverse in part and direct the trial court to amend the final judgment by removing all reference to the imposition of a charging or equitable lien. In all other respects, the final judgment is affirmed.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART.

DELL, J., and FRANK, RICHARD H., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

565 So. 2d 363, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 5380, 1990 WL 102712, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yarbrough-v-abe-rosenberg-pa-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack