You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

Geico Gen. Ins. Co. v. Steinger, Iscoe & Greene-II, P.A.

Citation: 275 So. 3d 775Docket: No. 3D18-1280

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; June 26, 2019; Florida; State Appellate Court

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this case, a dispute arose over the enforcement of a charging lien held by the law firm Steinger, Iscoe, Greene-II, P.A. (SIG) against a settlement between Aniushka Monsalve and GEICO General Insurance Company. Monsalve initially retained SIG to negotiate a claim against GEICO but later switched representation to Litigation Law, P.A. SIG promptly filed and communicated their charging lien to both GEICO and the successor firm. Despite this, GEICO settled the claim for $175,000 and directed the settlement check solely to Litigation Law, excluding SIG. Litigation Law subsequently disbursed the settlement funds to Monsalve without satisfying the lien. SIG's attempts to resolve the issue with Litigation Law failed, prompting SIG to sue GEICO. The trial court found GEICO negligent and liable for $50,000 in SIG's attorney's fees due to its failure to acknowledge and protect the lien. The court emphasized that GEICO had an obligation to include SIG on the settlement check or secure a release protecting SIG’s interest. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision, reinforcing the principle that a party aware of a charging lien must safeguard the attorney's rights, as established in precedents such as Hutchins v. Hutchins and Law Office of Michael B. Brehne, P.A. v. Porter Law Firm, LLC.

Legal Issues Addressed

Charging Lien Rights and Notification Requirements

Application: SIG timely filed a notice of charging lien with GEICO, establishing their equitable rights to the settlement funds.

Reasoning: SIG timely filed a notice of charging lien with GEICO and the new law firm, requesting that no settlement disbursements be made until the lien was resolved and that SIG's name be included on any settlement checks.

Duty to Safeguard Attorney's Interest in Settlement

Application: GEICO breached its duty by not notifying SIG of the settlement or including them on the check, resulting in liability for the attorney's fees.

Reasoning: Specifically, GEICO had a duty to notify SIG of the settlement and protect SIG's lien by either including SIG on the settlement check or obtaining a waiver or Hold Harmless agreement.

Joint and Several Liability for Attorney's Fees

Application: GEICO was held jointly and severally liable for SIG's attorney's fees due to its failure to protect the charging lien.

Reasoning: GEICO General Insurance Company was found negligent for failing to protect the charging lien of Aniushka Monsalve's former law firm, Steinger, Iscoe, Greene-II, P.A. (SIG), and was held jointly and severally liable for SIG's attorney's fees amounting to $50,000.

Negligence in Settlement Disbursement

Application: GEICO failed to include SIG as a payee on the settlement check despite having notice of the charging lien, leading to a finding of negligence.

Reasoning: Despite receiving this notice and a subsequent letter acknowledging the lien, GEICO settled Monsalve's claim for $175,000 but failed to include SIG as a payee on the settlement check, which was instead sent directly to Litigation Law.