Schwanebeck v. Calzado

524 So. 2d 478 | Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 1988

PER CURIAM.

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.¹ 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.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

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

Case Details

Case Name: Schwanebeck v. Calzado

Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida

Date Published: May 3, 1988

Citation: 524 So. 2d 478

Docket Number: No. 87-2851

Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.