Glickman v. Scherer
| Decision Date | 29 August 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 89-0140,89-0140 |
| Citation | 566 So.2d 574 |
| Parties | 15 Fla. L. Weekly D2159 Garry M. GLICKMAN, Appellant/Cross Appellee, v. Coralie SCHERER, Appellee/Cross Appellant, and James P. O'Flarity, Appellee/Cross Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Curtis L. Witters of Glickman, Witters and Marell, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant/cross appellee.
Coralie Scherer, Belmont, Cal., pro se.
James P. O'Flarity of Law Offices of James P. O'Flarity, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellee/cross appellee.
Appellant, Garry Glickman (Glickman), and his former-wife, appellee, Coralie Scherer (Scherer), appeal from final judgments enforcing Scherer's former attorney's charging lien for services rendered in a suit for modification of final judgment of dissolution. We reverse.
Scherer retained appellee, an attorney, for representation in response to her former husband's suit for modification. Glickman's suit sought a change in custody of the couples' minor child. The attorney represented Scherer throughout trial and, with an appeal pending, withdrew, citing his client's inability to pay. He then filed a notice of charging lien. Glickman and Scherer, thereafter, entered into an agreement, without notice to the former attorney, resolving their dispute and dismissing the appeal. The joint agreement modified child custody, visitation and support regarding the couples' minor child.
The attorney filed a motion to enforce his charging lien and at the hearing offered evidence as to the reasonable value of his services rendered. The trial court enforced the charging lien by two separate judgments. The first judgment ordered Glickman to pay $6,236.00 and held Scherer liable for any additional fees due and owing on the retainer agreement. The second judgment ordered Scherer to pay $6,607.29 in satisfaction of the additional fees.
The requirements for the imposition of a charging lien are:
1. There must be a contract between the attorney and client.
2. There must be an understanding, express or implied, between the parties that the payment is either dependent on recovery or that payment will come from the recovery.
3. The remedy is available where there has been an attempt to avoid the payment of fees, or a dispute as to the amount involved.
4. There are no requirements for perfecting a charging lien beyond "timely notice."
Zimmerman v. Livnat, 507 So.2d 1205, 1206 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987) (citing Sinclair, Louis, Siegel, Heath, Nussbaum & Zavertnik, P.A. v. Baucom, 428 So.2d 1383 (Fla.1983)). Proof of services rendered is insufficient to create an attorney's charging lien. The Third District in Litman v. Fine, Jacobson, Schwartz, Nash, Block & England, P.A., 517 So.2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), rev. denied, 525 So.2d 879 (1988) stated:
It is not enough, however, to support the imposition of a charging lien that an attorney has provided his...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Piccarreto v. Mura
...452 So.2d 1071, 1072 (Ct.App.Fla.1984) (attorney's charging lien is not enforceable against child support payments); Glickman v. Scherer, 566 So.2d 574, 575 (Fla.App.1990) (child support is not subject to an attorney's charging lien); Sanner v. Sanner, 46 S.W.2d 936, 937–38 (Mo.App.1932) (a......
-
Sue Davidson, P.C. v. Naranjo
...support' "); Brake, 452 So.2d at 1072 (attorney's charging lien is not enforceable against child support payments); Glickman v. Scherer, 566 So.2d 574, 575 (Fla.App.1990) (child support is not subject to an attorney's charging lien); Sanner v. Sanner, 46 S.W.2d 936, 937-38 (Mo.App.1932) (al......
-
Franklin & Marbin, P.A. v. Mascola
...had been no recovery of any monetary relief in the paternity action and that the lien was therefore a nullity. See Glickman v. Scherer, 566 So.2d 574 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Litman v. Fine Jacobson Schwartz Nash Block & England P.A., 517 So.2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Nevertheless, the trial cou......
-
Moffat v. Branch
...for the client, since the lien will attach only to the tangible fruits of the services.'" (quoting Glickman v. Scherer, 566 So.2d 574, 575 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App. 1990) (per curiam))). Again, we note that Moffat did not appeal the order of the federal district court. In granting the motions to di......
-
Attorneys' fees and costs
...in absence of evidence that award would not deprive wife of daily sustenance or minimal necessities of life); Glickman v. Scherer, 566 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) 17-13 Attorneys’ Fees and Costs §17:25 (nature of attorney’s representation in case, involving child custody, child support a......
-
Enforcement of orders and judgments
...in absence of evidence that award would not deprive wife of daily sustenance or minimal necessities of life); Glickman v. Scherer, 566 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (nature of attorney’s representation in case, involving child custody, child support and child visitation, did not result in ......
-
Lien cases
...v. Donald J. Sasser P.A ., 658 So.2d 1148, 1150 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), rev. denied , 669 So.2d 252 (Fla. 1996). 2. Glickman v. Scherer , 566 So.2d 574, 575 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). LIEN CASES 15-5 Lien Cases §15:10 3. Bailey v. Bailey , 546 So.2d 104, 105 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). 4. Wishoff v. Wishof......
-
Office management and case preparation
...in absence of evidence that award would not deprive wife of daily sustenance or minimal necessities of life.); Glickman v. Scherer , 566 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) (nature of attorney’s representation in case, involving child custody, child support and child visitation, did not result i......