Case ID: so2d_129/html/0184-01.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

Joseph A. ST. ANA, Appellant, v. WHEELER MATTISON DRUGS, INC., a Florida corporation, Amos Mattison and Ann Mattison, his wife, Appellees.
    No. 60-649.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.
    May 1, 1961.
    Rehearing Denied May 19, 1961.
    Carvajal & Davis, Miami, for appellant:..
    Franks & Gordon, Miami, for appellees..
   PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff, an attorney, appeals a judgment dismissing his complaint for the enforcement of a lien claimed under § 85.09,. Fla.Stat., F.S.A. The only question is-whether § 85.09, supra, provides a lien for-the services of attorneys. In Florida, as in. most states, a lawyer has a retaining lien upon papers in his hands and according to-the circumstances, a charging or equitable lien on recoveries obtained for a client in> the suit for the services in which the charge is made. Chancey v. Bauer, 5 Cir., 1938, 97 F.2d 293, 294; Billingham v. Thiele, Fla., App.1958, 107 So.2d 238, 243.

It was expressly held in Nichols v. Kroelinger, Fla.1950, 46 So.2d 722, 724, “under-the common law his [attorney’s] lien attached to the judgment and since we have-no statute in this State modifying or repealing the common law or protecting the lien, the common law is still in effect, * * * Section 85.09, supra, became a law in Florida many years prior to the-decision in the last-cited case. It has therefore been determined that this statute does-not apply to or create an additional attorney’s lien.

Affirmed.

HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and; CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.