PAMELA A. LEONE, APPELLANT,
v.
SAMUEL P. LEONE, ET AL., APPELLEES
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 should not be enforced against alimony if it deprives a former spouse of daily sustenance or minimal necessities of life.
The former wife's attorney sought attorney's fees via a charging lien against funds designated in a dissolution judgment to secure rehabilitative alim…
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.
Appellant, Pamela A. Leone (Wife), appeals an order granting her former counsel attorney’s fees pursuant to an attorney’s charging lien. We reverse and remand.
Florida courts have held that an attorney's charging lien should not be enforced against an award of alimony if to do so would deprive a former spouse of daily sustenance or the minimal necessities of life. Zimmerman v. Livnat, 507 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Brake v. Sanchez-Lopez, 452 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Dyer v. Dyer, 438 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983).
In the present case, the final judgment of dissolution of marriage ordered the husband to assign $250,000 of his $500,000 life insurance policy as follows: (1) $75,600 to the wife to secure rehabilitative alimony arrearages; and (2) $174,400 for the child.
We reverse and remand this case for the trial court to determine whether enforcement of the charging lien in this case would deprive the wife of daily sustenance or the minimal necessities of life. See Zimmerman v. Livnat, 507 So. 2d at 1207.
Although the trial court on remand could award fees out of the wife’s portion of the fund if the requirements of Zimmerman are met, the funds cannot be awarded from the child’s portion of the fund. Brake v. Sanchez-Lopez, 452 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Reversed and remanded with instructions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rose v. Marcus, 622 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…e proceeds from the sale of the marital home as long as the $40,000.00 awarded for advance payment of child support is not impaired and as long as the client is not deprived of daily sustenance or the minimum necessities of life. See Leone v. Leone, 619 So. 2d 323 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Zimmerman v. Livnat, 507 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Brake v. Sanchez-Lopez, 452 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Reversed and remanded with directions.…
-
Tucker v. Tucker, 165 So. 3d 798 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)…should not be enforced against an award of permanent periodic alimony if to do so would deprive a former spouse of daily sustenance or the minimal necessities of life.” Dyer v. Dyer, 438 So. 2d 954, 955 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); see also Leone v. Leone, 619 So. 2d 323, 323 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (reversing and remanding “for the trial court to determine whether enforcement of the charging lien [upon an alimony award] would deprive the wife of daily sustenance or the minimal necessities of life”). Here, the charging…
Authorities Cited
- Dyer v. Vaughn Dyer, 438 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- Zimmerman v. Eliezer J. Livnat and Esther Livnat, 507 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
- Brake v. Sanchez-Lopez, 452 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)