ASSOULINE & BERLOWE, P.A.
v.
801 HIALEAH DRIVE, LLC
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.
An attorney's charging lien may issue only when there is a client-attorney relationship and the attorney has actually recovered proceeds for the client; the lien cannot issue if no proceeds have been recovered.
[1] An attorney's charging lien attaches only to funds actually recovered by the client through a positive judgment or settlement; no lien may be imposed where the client has…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“An attorney's lien, or charging lien on funds recovered for a client through the attorney's services may issue only if there is a client-attorney relationship and the attorney has, in fact, recovered proceeds for his client. The lien may not issue if no proceeds have been recovered.”
From Pasin v. Kroo, cited as controlling authority on charging lien requirements.
Assouline & Berlowe, P.A. sought to impose a charging lien on funds in a case where the firm represented 801 Hialeah Drive, LLC. The appellant was the…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Attorney'S Charging Lien cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Pasin v. Kroo, 412 So. 2d 43, 44 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) (“An attorney's lien, or charging lien on funds recovered for a client through the attorney’s services may issue only if there is a client-attorney relationship and the attorney has, in fact, recovered proceeds for his client. The lien may not issue if no proceeds have been recovered. [Appellant] was the losing party so there was no recovery of funds.” (internal citations omitted)); Litman v. Fine, Jacobson, Schwartz, Nash, Block & England, P.A., 517 So. 2d 88, 91-92 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987) (“It is not enough, however, to support the imposition of a charging lien that an attorney has provided his services; the services must, in addition, produce a positive judgment or settlement for the client, since the lien will attach only to the tangible fruits of the services.”).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Elliot v. State, 517 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Pasin v. Kroo, 412 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)