Case Name: Erskin BOLES, etc. et al., Appellant, v. ESTATE OF Ford ROMER, etc., et al., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1992-03-20
Citations: 595 So. 2d 296
Docket Number: Nos. 91-520, 91-521
Parties: Erskin BOLES, etc. et al., Appellant, v. ESTATE OF Ford ROMER, etc., et al., Appellees.
Judges: HARRIS and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 595
Pages: 296–297

Head Matter:
Erskin BOLES, etc. et al., Appellant, v. ESTATE OF Ford ROMER, etc., et al., Appellees.
Nos. 91-520, 91-521.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
March 20, 1992.
Leonard R. Ross, Daytona Beach, for appellant Erskin Boles.
Richard D. Sneed, Jr., Fort Pierce, for appellant Richard D. Sneed, Jr., P.A.
Horace E. Hill, Sr., Daytona Beach, for appellee Estate of Ford Romer.
Elijah Boles, pro se.

Opinion:
POUND, F., Associate Judge.
These consolidated appeals follow a final judgment in a complex, confused estate. One of the attorneys, Richard D. Sneed, Jr., was permitted to withdraw in 1989 by an order which provided for a charging lien. A "final judgment" was entered February 6, 1991. Sometime later, an undated motion to "annul, expunge, and to vacate and set aside" was filed by the personal representative, seeking to remove Sneed's charging lien. The motion contains no certificate of service, and the record is devoid of any notice to Sneed prior to the entry on March 5, 1991, of the court's order granting this motion and declaring the charging lien "annulled, expunged, and vacated and set aside." Sneed has appealed this order based on his lack of notice. We agree this order must be quashed and the cause remanded for hearing on the motion, after appropriate notice to all interested parties. We find no error in the rulings challenged by appellant Erskin Boles in the consolidated appeal.
AFFIRMED in part; ORDER QUASHED; REMANDED for hearing.
HARRIS and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.