MARK J. FELDMAN, ESQUIRE, APPELLANT,
v.
NEW ALLIANCE INSURANCE COMPANY, ELENA TAULER, ESQ., AND DANIEL BRYANT, 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.
The trial court erred in denying the attorney's motion for fees because the attorney provided services and initiated a suit that resulted in a favorable settlement.
An attorney filed a breach of contract suit for his client against an insurer. The attorney was discharged and filed a charging lien for fees. The cli…
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 Reasonable Value Of Services cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In the underlying case, attorney Mark J. Feldman represented Daniel Bryant in a breach of contract suit against New Alliance Insurance Company, the insurer of Bryant’s automobile, following an accident in which Bryant’s automobile was damaged. The action was filed two weeks after the accident; Feldman was discharged shortly thereafter. Feldman filed a charging lien to recover the attorney’s fees due him. Bryant then hired Elena Tauler to represent him and the suit was ultimately settled. Both attorney Tauler and New Alliance refused to pay Feldman’s attorney’s fees. The trial court denied Feld-man’s motion for attorney’s fees under the rationale that the suit against New Alliance was filed “prematurely” and did not actually help his client’s position with respect to recovering insurance proceeds. This appeal followed.
It is undisputed that attorney Feldman provided some legal services to Bryant and that he established a charging hen relating to these services. Ultimately, the suit initiated by Feldman on Bryant’s behalf resulted in a settlement with New Alliance favorable to Bryant. Certainly, Feldman was entitled to the reasonable value of the work he performed for Bryant. See e.g., Rosenberg v. Levin, 409 So. 2d 1016 (Fla.1982); Sohn v. Brockington, 371 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). Thus, the trial court erred in denying Feldman’s motion for attorney’s fees.
We reverse the order under review and remand for determination of the amount of attorney’s fees due Mr. Feldman from the insurer and then for indemnification, if any.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Boose v. In re Guardianship OF Kristin Leigh Runco, 741 So. 2d 1219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…limony and child support. The actions initiated by appellant on appellee’s behalf resulted in a settlement with appellee’s wife favorable to appellee. Charging liens have been enforced in similar circumstances. See Feldman v. New Alliance Ins. Co., 722 So. 2d 938 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); see also Law Office of Sara Lawrence, P.A. v. Livingston, 702 So. 2d 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Sharyn D. Garfield, P.A. v. Green, 687 So. 2d 1388 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). As we said in Gaebe, Murphy, Mullen & Antonelli v. Bradt, 704…
Authorities Cited
- Rosenberg v. Levin, 409 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 1982)
- Sohn v. Brockington, 371 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)