HUGO ESCALANTE, M.D., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
ORLANDO DOPICO, ET AL., APPELLEES

Fla. 3d DCA | 1989-06-27
Nos. 88-465, 88-873
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and LEVY, JJ.
545 So. 2d 496 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1989)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that the trial court erred in awarding attorney's fees that exceeded the contingency fee agreement between the client and attorney.


Facts & Procedural History

An anesthesiologist appealed an adverse judgment and attorney's fees award in a medical malpractice case. The jury awarded over one million dollars in…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

An anesthesiologist appeals from an adverse judgment and an award of attorney’s fees in a medical malpractice case. We reject all the appellant’s claims with reference to the malpractice judgment and affirm that award. However, we reverse the award of attorney’s fees for the following reason.

The jury awarded damages of just over one million dollars. A post-trial attorney’s fee hearing was held pursuant to section 768.56, Florida Statutes (1983) (repealed Ch. 85-175, § 43, Laws of Fla.). The trial court awarded a fee of $750,000. However, the unambiguous provisions of the contingency fee agreement between the •client and the attorney limited the fee to forty percent of the recovery.

Because of the existence of this contingent fee agreement, it was error for the court to award a fee which exceeded the fee agreement reached between the attorney and his client. Miami Children’s Hosp. v. Tamayo, 529 So. 2d 667 (Fla.1988); Florida Patient’s Compensation Fund v. Rowe, 472 So. 2d 1145 (Fla.1985); see Perez-Borroto v. Brea, 544 So. 2d 1022 (Fla.1989); World Serv. Life Ins. Co. v. Bodiford, 537 So. 2d 1381 (Fla.1989).

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw