Case ID: so2d_931/html/1059-02.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

SHELOWITZ, SHELOWITZ, TERRELL & COFFEY, P.A., Petitioner, v. Hortense PETERS, Respondent.
    No. 4D06-1449.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    July 5, 2006.
    
      Marc Shelowitz of Shelowitz, Shelowitz, Terrell & Coffey, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for petitioner.
    No response by respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

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.

POLEN, FARMER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.