SHELOWITZ SHELOWITZ TERRELL COFFEY v. PETERS (2006)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,Fourth District.

SHELOWITZ, SHELOWITZ, TERRELL & COFFEY, P.A., Petitioner, v. Hortense PETERS, Respondent.

No. 4D06-1449.

Decided: July 05, 2006

Marc Shelowitz of Shelowitz, Shelowitz, Terrell & Coffey, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for petitioner. No response by respondent.

Former counsel for the wife in an ongoing dissolution of marriage proceeding seeks review of a nonfinal order granting her motion to release discovery papers to her, in spite of her delinquency in paying fees she owes the firm. The firm filed a notice of retaining lien. We grant the petition.

In granting release of the files, the trial court stated that the “firm does not have a contract or a court order granting a retaining lien.” But the firm did have an implied-in-fact contract, even if not written, and did not need a court order to maintain its lien. Andrew Hall & Assocs. v. Ghanem, 679 So.2d 60, 61-62 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

The order on review is capable of causing irreparable harm to the firm's retaining lien. Rutherford, Mulhall & Wargo, P.A. v. Antidormi, 695 So.2d 1300 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). Accordingly, the petition is granted and the order is hereby quashed.

Petition Granted.

PER CURIAM.

POLEN, FARMER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network