Posted by Nydia Streets of Streets Law in Florida Family Law Procedure
When an attorney seeks to enforce a charging lien in a Florida family law case, four elements must exist: (1) a valid contract, express or implied, between attorney and client; (2) their shared understanding that payment depends on recovery; (3) the client’s attempt to avoid payment or a dispute over the amount owed; and (4) timely notice of the lien. See Baldwin v. Beam, 5D2024-2423 (Fla. 5th DCA December 5, 2025).
In this case, an attorney sought to enforce a charging lien against a former client. At a hearing on the lien, the court relied on an hourly rate not agreed-to between the attorney and the client. The attorney admitted at the hearing that the $600 rate found to be reasonable by the court was not expressly agreed to in a contract between the attorney and the client. But the court found it was agreed to despite the client’s testimony at the hearing to the contrary.
The court reversed the lien, holding “In sum, there was no basis for the court to anchor the amount of the charging lien to the fee judgment entered earlier in the case, which arose from judicial reasonableness findings—not the contract between Baldwin and Beam. By relying on the fee judgment instead of the contract, the court committed reversible error. See Flynn v. Sarasota Cnty. Pub. Hosp. Bd., 169 F. Supp. 2d 1363, 1370 (M.D. Fla. 2001) (‘[I]t follows that there can be no charging lien for additional fees as Florida law clearly holds that there can be no award of fees . . . in excess of the contract rate.’); In re Hanson Dredging, Inc., 15 B.R. 79, 83 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1981) (concluding that a lawyer’s charging lien must be based on his agreement with the client, not the amount of fees awarded to him by the court). On remand, the court must determine what Baldwin owes Beam under their contract, not the earlier fee judgment.”
Nothing in this article should be taken as legal advice; schedule a meeting with a Miami family lawyer for specific advice about your case.