From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Schwanebeck v. Calzado

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
May 3, 1988
524 So. 2d 478 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

Opinion

No. 87-2851.

May 3, 1988.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Dade County, Jack M. Turner, J.

Stinson, Lyons, Gerlin Bustamante and Douglas Lyons, Miami, for appellants.

Glassford Glassford and K. Neil Glassford, South Miami, for appellees.

Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and JORGENSON, JJ.


The attorney appellee, Glassford, who had been retained under a contingency fee contract, effected a $50,000 settlement of his clients' personal injury action only after he had been discharged and replaced by another lawyer. The trial judge was therefore in error in awarding him a $10,000 fee based upon the occurrence of the contingency. Instead, pursuant to Rosenberg v. Levin, 409 So.2d 1016 (Fla. 1982), Glassford was entitled only to a quantum meruit recovery for the services he rendered prior to discharge. The undisputed evidence below was that that fee amounted to $1,150. Upon remand the fee shall be reduced to that amount.

In effect, the $20,000 fee, which was 40% of the recovery, was split between Glassford and his successor.

Reversed and remanded with directions.


Summaries of

Schwanebeck v. Calzado

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
May 3, 1988
524 So. 2d 478 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)
Case details for

Schwanebeck v. Calzado

Case Details

Full title:BEVERLY ANN SCHWANEBECK, ET AL., APPELLANTS, v. ARGIMIRO ERIC CALZADO, ET…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: May 3, 1988

Citations

524 So. 2d 478 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1988)

Citing Cases

Zaklama v. Mount Sinai Medical Center

Even when the contingency has occurred almost at the time of the attorney's discharge, the " Rosenberg rule"…

Trend Coin v. Fuller, Feingold

Even when the contingency has almost occurred at the time of the attorney's discharge, the fee awarded the…