Stacy Jaeger v. Robert M. Jaeger, D.O.
182 So. 3d 697
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.2015Background
- Former husband failed to pay temporary family support (undifferentiated arrearages) during dissolution; trial court later awarded a lump-sum payment for those arrearages.
- Husband paid portions of that lump-sum; funds were deposited with the clerk and the husband’s attorney.
- Two of the former wife’s attorneys moved to impose charging liens on the lump-sum to secure unpaid legal fees; the magistrate recommended denying the liens as they could not attach to child support or undifferentiated support.
- The magistrate found the undifferentiated award was for necessities (temporary support) and that immediate payment to the wife was necessary for daily sustenance.
- The trial court reversed the magistrate as a matter of law (relying on Albert), granted the attorneys’ objections, ordered the lien paid out of the lump-sum, and denied immediate release to the former wife.
- The Fourth District reversed the trial court, holding charging liens may not be enforced against awards for past-due undifferentiated temporary family support (child support and temporary alimony for necessities).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether an attorney’s charging lien may attach to an undifferentiated lump-sum award of past-due family support (temporary child support and alimony). | Jaeger (wife’s counsel): charging lien may attach to award for alimony portion; lien should be paid from the lump-sum. | Former wife (seeking funds): lien cannot attach to child support or undifferentiated support because those funds are for necessities and not severable; immediate release required. | Charging liens may not be asserted against awards of past-due undifferentiated temporary family support (child support and temporary alimony for necessities); funds must be released for necessities. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dyer v. Dyer, 438 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983) (charging lien should not be enforced against permanent periodic alimony if it would deprive a former spouse of necessities)
- Fuqua v. Fuqua, 558 P.2d 801 (Wash. 1977) (charging liens may not attach to back child support or to commingled funds that include child support)
- Brake v. Sanchez-Lopez, 452 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984) (attorney’s charging lien cannot attach to child support)
- Albert v. Goldman-Link, P.A., 661 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (upholding a charging lien in an arrearage action but not addressing an undifferentiated award)
- Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980) (discussion of purposes of alimony: necessities and equity)