What is an attorney's lien, and how does it affect your settlement?

Somebody told you that if you leave your law firm, it can put a lien on your case. Maybe the firm said it in a letter. Maybe a friend said it as a warning. The word does a lot of damage on its own, because most people have only heard it attached to a house or a car, and they assume it means someone is coming after what they own.

Tell us about your case

or call 1-866-568-4913

That is not what this is. An attorney's charging lien in Florida is a claim against one specific thing, and Florida's courts have been precise about what that thing is for more than forty years.

What is an attorney's charging lien in Florida?

It is an equitable claim on the recovery in the case the lawyer handled — nothing more and nothing less. The Florida Supreme Court defined it in one sentence that is still the starting point for every lien dispute in the state:

"The charging lien is an equitable right to have costs and fees due an attorney for services in the suit secured to him in the judgment or recovery in that particular suit. It serves to protect the rights of the attorney."

Sinclair, Louis, Siegel, Heath, Nussbaum & Zavertnik, P.A. v. Baucom, 428 So. 2d 1383, 1384 (Fla. 1983)

Read the last six words again: in that particular suit. The lien is tied to your case. It is not a general debt that follows you around, and it is not security taken against your property.

There is also no statute behind it, which surprises people who expect to find a lien law on the books. The Supreme Court said so directly: "No statutes outline the requirements for valid attorney's liens in Florida. Rather, case law acts as the sole guide for both attorneys and courts as to these liens." Daniel Mones, P.A. v. Smith, 486 So. 2d 559, 561 (Fla. 1986). Everything on this page comes from decisions and from the Bar rules, because that is all there is.

What does a law firm have to prove to get one?

Four things. The Supreme Court collected them from Sinclair into a list in Mones, and a firm that cannot show all four does not have a lien:

1. A contract with you, express or implied.
2. An understanding that the fee would be paid out of the recovery, express or implied. In a contingency case this is the agreement itself.
3. Either an avoidance of payment or a dispute about the amount. A lien is a response to a fight about money, not a routine filing.
4. Timely notice. Which has a specific meaning, and it is the element firms most often get wrong.

See Mones, 486 So. 2d at 561, applying Sinclair, 428 So. 2d at 1385. And on the mechanics of the fourth element, Sinclair added a sentence that cuts off a lot of argument: "There are no requirements for perfecting a charging lien beyond timely notice." 428 So. 2d at 1385. There is no form, no recording office, no filing fee. There is notice, given in time.

What can an attorney's lien actually reach?

The recovery. The Fifth District puts it as "the tangible fruits of the services" — the money or property the lawyer's work produced. Law Office of Michael B. Brehne, P.A. v. Porter Law Firm, LLC, 268 So. 3d 854, 855 (Fla. 5th DCA 2019).

So, plainly, the things it does not reach:

• Not your home. A charging lien is not recorded against real estate.
• Not your wages. It is not a garnishment and it is not a judgment against you personally.
• Not your bank account or your car. There is nothing for a former firm to seize.
• Not your credit. A charging lien asserted in your injury case is a claim in that case against that recovery. It is not a consumer debt reported to a credit bureau.
• Not a different case. The lien belongs to the suit the lawyer worked on.

One real consequence does follow from a properly noticed lien, and it is the reason firms bother: once perfected, the lien can be asserted against whoever is holding the money that becomes the proceeds of your case — including the insurance company. In Brehne, the insurers had notice of the former firm's lien and paid the settlement to the client's new lawyer anyway; the court held the lien was not impaired, because the new lawyer was holding the disputed funds in trust, but it also said the insurers could not have escaped liability simply by handing the money to someone else. 268 So. 3d at 855.

That is the mechanism working the way it is supposed to. The money stops in a trust account instead of disappearing, and nobody comes after you.

Do you write a check to your old law firm?

Normally, no. A charging lien is paid out of the recovery, at the end, from the same attorney fee your new firm's agreement already describes. Three rules combine to keep the fight away from your own money.

First, the trust rule. When a lawyer holds money that two people claim — and a former firm's fee claim is exactly that — the rule is explicit about what must happen, and about what must not be held up:

"When in the course of representation a lawyer is in possession of property in which 2 or more persons (1 of whom may be the lawyer) claim interests, the property must be treated by the lawyer as trust property, but the portion belonging to the lawyer or law firm must be withdrawn within a reasonable time after it becomes due unless the right of the lawyer or law firm to receive it is disputed, in which event the portion in dispute must be kept separate by the lawyer until the dispute is resolved. The lawyer must promptly distribute all portions of the property as to which the interests are not in dispute."

R. Regulating Fla. Bar 5-1.1(f)

The last sentence is the one to hold on to. What is in dispute is set aside. What is not in dispute is distributed promptly — and your share of a settlement is normally not what the two firms are arguing about. They are arguing about how to divide the fee.

Second, that is what actually happened in Brehne. The new firm held the disputed fee money in trust while the two firms litigated the division between themselves. The opinion notes in a footnote that their fight over the fee was still pending. The client's case was over.

Third, if a court has to get involved, courts hold the money rather than making you hold the risk. In Mones, the Supreme Court directed that the funds stay in the court registry until the fee dispute was finally resolved. 486 So. 2d at 562.

And at the end, you get a document that proves the arithmetic. Rule 4-1.5(f)(5) requires a closing statement "reflecting an itemization of all costs and expenses, together with the amount of fee received by each participating lawyer or law firm," signed by every lawyer and by you. If you want to see the complete picture of how one fee becomes two shares, that is covered in how two law firms divide one contingency fee.

How much can the former firm claim?

No more than its own contract would ever have paid it, and only if your case recovers money. That ceiling is the holding of Rosenberg v. Levin: a lawyer discharged without cause recovers the reasonable value of services in quantum meruit, "but recovery is limited to the maximum fee set in the contract entered into for those services." 409 So. 2d 1016, 1017 (Fla. 1982). In a contingency case, the Court added, the claim "arises only upon the successful occurrence of the contingency," and "[i]f the client fails in his recovery, the discharged attorney will similarly fail and recover nothing." 409 So. 2d at 1022.

Within that ceiling, the amount is not a calculation. Florida rejected the hours-times-rate approach for this situation in Searcy, Denney, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. v. Poletz, 652 So. 2d 366 (Fla. 1995), and told trial courts to weigh the whole relationship instead:

"For example, the fee agreement itself, the reason the attorney was discharged, actions taken by the attorney or client before or after discharge, and the benefit actually conferred on the client may be relevant to that determination."

Searcy, Denney, 652 So. 2d at 369

Notice which direction most of that list points. Why you left is a factor. What the firm did after you left is a factor. Whether its work actually helped you — not whether it opened a file and sent letters — is a factor. Whether you end up paying two attorney fees takes this apart with the numbers.

What if your lawyer quit instead of being fired?

Then the answer is much more favorable to you, and most people have it backwards. A lawyer who walks away from a contingency case before the contingency happens does not get a reduced fee. Under Florida Supreme Court precedent, that lawyer gets nothing:

"[W]hen an attorney withdraws from representation upon his own volition, and the contingency has not occurred, the attorney forfeits all rights to compensation."

Faro v. Romani, 641 So. 2d 69, 71 (Fla. 1994)

The Court built in one narrow exception: where the client's own conduct made it legally impossible for the lawyer to continue, or would have forced the lawyer to violate an ethical rule, the lawyer may have a claim. The same opinion also quoted an earlier disciplinary case describing a contract that let a lawyer withdraw without client fault and still bill for work done as "unenforceable and unethical," citing The Florida Bar v. Hollander, 607 So. 2d 412, 415 (Fla. 1992). In Faro itself, the lien was ordered discharged.

So the first question to answer about any lien letter is who ended the representation, and why. If the firm is leaving, what happens when your lawyer wants to drop your case is the page for that situation.

A lien on the money and a hold on your file are two different things

This is the part that gets flattened everywhere else, and it matters, because the second kind of lien is the one with real leverage in it.

A charging lien is about the recovery. A retaining lien is about the physical things in the lawyer's possession — your papers, your records, your file. The Supreme Court described the second one in broad terms: "In Florida an attorney has a right to a retaining lien upon all of the client's property in the attorney's possession, including money collected for the client." And unlike a charging lien, "a retaining lien covers the balance due for all legal work done on behalf of the client regardless of whether the property is related to the matter for which the money is owed to the attorney." Mones, 486 So. 2d at 561.

The Fourth District has been the most candid about how a retaining lien works in practice:

"A retaining lien is a passive one; it cannot be enforced through foreclosure and rests wholly upon the right to retain possession until the bill is paid.... The pressure exerted by a retaining lien is directly proportional to the client's need and desire for the things in the attorney's possession. Standing alone, the client's lack of funds to pay the outstanding bill does not defeat the lien."

Andrew Hall and Associates v. Ghanem, 679 So. 2d 60, 61–62 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)

And on how a client gets the file back, the same court had already set the rule out plainly:

"Absent a clear necessity in a criminal case where the defendant cannot post security for payment of the indebtedness or a situation where the lawyer possessing the lien is entirely at fault causing his withdrawal, the erstwhile client is entitled to delivery of his papers or other property subject to the lien only if he pays the amount due or secures the payment thereof."

Wintter v. Fabber, 618 So. 2d 375, 377 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)

Three practical points come out of those two cases. A trial court can hold a hearing to fix the amount owed and to set the terms of adequate security, so this does not have to be a standoff. A court order releasing a file without providing security for the fee can be reversed, which is what happened in Ghanem. And "I cannot afford to pay it" is not, by itself, an answer to a retaining lien.

Two things cut the other way, and a new firm will look at both. The Bar rule requires a departing lawyer to protect your interests, including "surrendering papers and property to which the client is entitled," though it then allows the lawyer to "retain papers and other property relating to or belonging to the client to the extent permitted by law." R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-1.16(d). And a firm that obstructs the handoff can reduce the value of its own claim: in Searcy, where the discharged firm refused to turn over the file and told its experts not to speak with the new lawyers, the Supreme Court said that conduct "may affect the value of the services rendered to the client." 652 So. 2d at 369 n.5.

There is also a question the published cases have not squarely settled for contingency clients: whether a firm can assert a retaining lien when, under Rosenberg, no fee is yet due because the case has not recovered anything. The Ghanem court cited with approval a federal decision that denied a retaining lien to a lawyer who had taken on a client knowing she could pay only out of an eventual award. Quinn v. Headley, 637 F. Supp. 707 (S.D.N.Y. 1986), cited in Ghanem, 679 So. 2d at 62. That is a persuasive authority from another jurisdiction, not a Florida holding, and the answer in your case belongs to a lawyer reading your contract. What happens to your case file goes through the handoff step by step.

When does the lien have to be noticed, and what if it is late?

Before your case ends. That is the real content of "timely notice," and the Supreme Court spelled out what a firm has to do:

"In order to give timely notice of a charging lien an attorney should either file a notice of lien or otherwise pursue the lien in the original action."

Mones, 486 So. 2d at 561

The firm in Mones lost its charging lien on exactly this point. It had held back $22,000 of a settlement and sued its former clients for fees, and the Court held that was not enough: the lawyer "was obligated to notify his clients in some way before the close of the original proceeding that he intended to pursue the charging lien. Simply filing suit gave his former clients insufficient notice." 486 So. 2d at 561. In Sinclair itself, and in the Fourth District case the trial court compared it to, the attorneys had not filed notice until after final judgment — and that timing was fatal.

The Court also said where this gets decided: "A summary proceeding in the original action represents the preferred method of enforcing an attorney's charging lien in Florida." Mones, 486 So. 2d at 561. In other words, in front of the judge already handling your case, not in a separate lawsuit against you.

None of which means you should hope a former firm misses a deadline. A firm that notices its lien properly and early has a valid claim against the fee, and that claim is the normal, expected outcome of changing lawyers. It is worth knowing the rule because it tells you where the question gets answered, and by whom.

What the arithmetic looks like

These figures are an illustration with round numbers, chosen to show how the structure works. They are not a case result, they do not come from any firm's file, and nothing here predicts what any particular claim is worth or what any particular firm would receive.

Assume a case that settles for $240,000, a contingency agreement at 33 1/3 percent, $9,000 in case costs advanced by the first firm, and a charging lien noticed by that firm before the case resolved. Medical liens are a separate subject and are set aside here.

The point of the table is the bottom two rows. A charging lien is a question about the $80,000, answered between the lawyers. It is not a question about the $151,000, and it is not a question about anything you owned before the crash.

What to ask the next firm before you sign anything

A firm that handles substitutions regularly will answer all five of these without hesitating.

1. Who handles the prior firm's lien — your office or me? You want the answer to be the office, in writing.
2. Will your fee agreement say that my total attorney fee does not increase because of the prior firm's claim? This belongs in the document, not in a conversation.
3. Has the prior firm already noticed a lien, and where? If a notice was filed in the court case, there is a document to look at.
4. If the old firm holds my file, what is your plan — and who pays for security if a court requires it? This is the retaining-lien question, and it is the one with real cost in it.
5. What will my closing statement show? Ask for the categories now, so the end of the case holds no surprises.

What is genuinely uncertain here

The parts of this that nobody can promise you:

• The amount of the claim. Rosenberg fixes the ceiling and Searcy names the factors, but which factors matter and what the final figure is are, in the Searcy court's words, "matters within the sound discretion of the trial court." 652 So. 2d at 369.
• Whether your discharge was for cause. A fact question, frequently contested, and an express factor in the valuation.
• Your own file. Whether a firm will assert a retaining lien, and what a court would do with it in a contingency case where no fee is yet due, depends on your contract and your circumstances.
• Costs. The lien is about fees. What happens to the costs the first firm advanced is governed by the agreement you signed, which is why case costs versus attorney fees exists as its own page.

Where to go from here

• If you change lawyers, do you pay two attorney fees? — the fee question, with the numbers.
• How two law firms divide one contingency fee — the 75/25 rule and the court-approval route.
• Case costs versus attorney fees — the part that actually surprises people.
• What happens to your case file — the handoff, document by document.
• Can you change attorneys in the middle of a Florida injury case? — the right itself, and where it comes from.
• What happens when your lawyer wants to drop your case — the reverse situation, and the better answer.

Cases this covers

Participating firms handle Florida injury claims. If your case is one of these and it is already with another attorney, it is the kind of case this service was built for.

• Car accidents
• Truck accidents
• Motorcycle accidents
• Rideshare accidents
• Slip and fall
• Pedestrian and bicycle
• Dog bites
• Wrongful death

How this works