Case Name: Howard LIFSHUTZ, M.D., Appellant, v. ATKINSON, JENNE, DINER, STONE & COHEN, P.A., f/k/a Atkinson, Golden, Jenne, Diner, Stone, & Butterworth, P.A., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1989-10-18
Citations: 549 So. 2d 1214
Docket Number: No. 88-2045
Parties: Howard LIFSHUTZ, M.D., Appellant, v. ATKINSON, JENNE, DINER, STONE & COHEN, P.A., f/k/a Atkinson, Golden, Jenne, Diner, Stone, & Butterworth, P.A., Appellees.
Judges: WARNER, J., and KANAREK, PAUL B., Associate Judge, concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 549
Pages: 1214–1215

Head Matter:
Howard LIFSHUTZ, M.D., Appellant, v. ATKINSON, JENNE, DINER, STONE & COHEN, P.A., f/k/a Atkinson, Golden, Jenne, Diner, Stone, & Butterworth, P.A., Appellees.
No. 88-2045.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Oct. 18, 1989.
Karen M. Zann of Karen M. Zann, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
David W. Black of Atkinson, Jenne, Diner, Stone & Cohen, P.A., Hollywood, for appellees.

Opinion:
LETTS, Judge.
This appeal concerns the existence of genuine issues of material facts which should have precluded the entry of a final summary judgment. We reverse.
While the deposition in the file, and the affidavit in opposition to the motion for summary judgment, are somewhat equivocal, it is clear that the law firm's client is alleging that he settled an approximately $24,000 attorney's fee for a mere $5,000. Needless to say, the law firm denies any such arrangement.
As we see it, this controversy boils down to a question of credibility. That being so, under the facts of this case, a final summary judgment was inappropriate.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
WARNER, J., and KANAREK, PAUL B., Associate Judge, concur.