ROBERT S. LYONS, APPELLANT,
v.
ANDRE S. CAPI, M.D., APPELLEE
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 appeals an order declining to enter a declaratory decree regarding payment for an expert witness's services. The court held that the declaratory judgment action was improper because the dispute presented a simple debtor-creditor relationship that could be adequately resolved through a common law action.
The court held that the declaratory decree action was improper because the complaint raised only issues pertaining to a simple debtor-creditor relationship between the parties, which could be adequately determined through a traditional common law action.
“The allegations of the complaint dealing with the agreement between the bar association and the medical association presented no justiciable issue which could be determined in this cause.”
Establishes that the declaratory action failed because there was no justiciable controversy that could be resolved, as the associations were not parties.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Lyons, an attorney, represented a party in a malpractice suit and had the defendant, a medical doctor, subpoenaed for discovery deposition a…
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 Debtor-Creditor Relationship cases and more on FLexlaw
The plaintiff, Robert S. Lyons, a practicing attorney in Fort Lauderdale, appeals an order of the trial court declining to enter declaratory decree. The order also transferred the cause to the court of record because the amount of the counterclaim of the defendant, Andre S. Capi, M.D., was below the jurisdictional amount upon which an action could be brought in the circuit court.
The plaintiff represented a party in a malpractice claim against a medical doctor. In connection with the preparation of said case the defendant here was subpoenaed for discovery deposition and later testified at the trial. The verdict at the trial was against the plaintiff in the malpractice suit; and the defendant here, upon failure to receive payment for his services, threatened suit against the plaintiff as attorney for the plaintiff in the malpractice suit for his fees in the amount of $175.00.
The plaintiff alleged as basis for jurisdiction the fact that the defendant doctor had threatened to sue him personally for the bill on the basis of an agreement between the Broward County Bar Association and the Broward County Medical Association that when doctors are engaged to testify in court the doctors are considered as having been engaged by the attorney who requested such service at the fee in accordance with an agreed fee schedule of the two associations for such services.
*910The allegations of the complaint dealing with the agreement between the bar association and the medical association presented no justiciable issue which could be determined in this cause. Neither the bar association nor the medical association were parties. The complaint sought only a declaration of the plaintiff’s rights as it pertained to the defendant. The complaint therefore raised only issues pertaining to the claimed debtor-creditor relationship between the parties. The usual, normal and historic common law action is an appropriate, adequate and complete method of determining that issue and therefore the declaratory decree action was improper. See Florida Hotel and Restaurant Commission v. Marseilles Hotel Co., Fla.1956, 84 So.2d 567 and Garner v. De Soto Ranch, Inc., Fla.App.1963, 150 So.2d 493.
Affirmed.
SMITH, C. J., and WALDEN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kelner v. Woodrew W. Woody and Anna Woody, 399 So. 2d 35 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…n granting such relief, and the court may decline to grant a declaratory decree where more appropriate redress is available. Stark v. Marshall, 67 So. 2d 235 (Fla.1953); Bowden v. Seaboard Air Line R. R. Co., 47 So. 2d 786 (Fla.1950); Lyons v. Capi, 188 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966); Jacksonville Roofing Ass’n v. Local Union No. 435, 156 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963), cert. denied, 162 So. 2d 667 (Fla.1964); Garner v. De Soto Ranch, Inc., supra. As we have pointed out, appellants may bring an action for bre…
-
Christensen Shipyards, Ltd. v. Derecktor-Gunnell, Inc., 825 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Columbia Cas. Co. v. Zimmerman, 62 So. 2d 338 (Fla.1952); Reddick v. Christie, 226 So. 2d 434 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969); and Lyons v. Capi, 188 So. 2d 909 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966). STONE, MAY, JJ., and JACOBUS, BRUCE W., Associate Judge, concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Hotel & Rest. Comm'n & Richard Edgerton v. Marseilles Hotel Co., 84 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 1956)
- Garner v. DE Soto Ranch, Inc., 150 So. 2d 493 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)