ROGER S. TRONTZ, APPELLANT,
v.
STEVEN L. WINIG, ESQUIRE, ET AL., APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2005-07-06
No. 4D04-226
KLEIN and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
905 So. 2d 1026 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2005) Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases


Opinion of the Court
WARNER, J.

WARNER, J.

Appellant challenges a summary final judgment foreclosing his attorney’s charging lien on his homestead property. Because appellant failed to challenge, and in fact agreed to, the earlier final order that specifically applied the charging lien to appellant’s homestead, we affirm. The order granting the lien was an appealable final order, and appellant did not appeal it. See, e.g., Shawzin v. Donald J. Sasser, P.A., 658 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Albert v. Goldman-Link, P.A., 661 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). Moreover, unlike Sherbill v. Miller Manufacturing Co., 89 So. 2d 28 (Fla.1956), on which appellant relies, here appellant specifically agreed to a charging lien on his homestead property, described in the order as an agreed disposition of his attorney’s claim. He also specifically waived his homestead protection as to the property. This specific agreed waiver in settlement of the claim distinguishes this case from Sherbill.

KLEIN and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Benitez Jr. v. Leal, 272 So. 3d 506 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)
    …a. 3d DCA 2014). We reject without extensive discussion the Attorney’s contention that we lack jurisdiction because the Client’s notice of appeal was untimely. The initial order granting a lien was indeed a final order, see Trontz v. Winig, 905 So. 2d 1026, 1027 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005), and the Client’s motion for rehearing suspended rendition until a successor judge denied it (and, for the elimination of doubt, reaffirmed that the charging lien order “remains in full force and effect”). As to t…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw