Case ID: so2d_524/html/0478-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Beverly Ann SCHWANEBECK, et al., Appellants, v. Argimiro Eric CALZADO, et al., Appellees.
    No. 87-2851.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    May 3, 1988.
    
      Stinson, Lyons, Gerlin & Bustamante and Douglas Lyons, Miami, for appellants.
    Glassford & Glassford and K. Neil Glass-ford, South Miami, for appellees.
    Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and JORGENSON, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The attorney appellee, Glassford, who had been retained under a contingency fee contract, effected a $50,000 settlement of his clients’ personal injury action only after he had been discharged and replaced by another lawyer. The trial judge was therefore in error in awarding him a $10,000 fee based upon the occurrence of the contingency. Instead, pursuant to Rosenberg v. Levin, 409 So.2d 1016 (Fla.1982), Glassford was entitled only to a quantum meruit recovery for the services he rendered prior to discharge. The undisputed evidence below was that that fee amounted to $1,150. Upon remand the fee shall be reduced to that amount.

Reversed and remanded with directions. 
      
      . In effect, the $20,000 fee, which was 40% of the recovery, was split between Glassford and his successor.