FELICETTI LAW FIRM, PLLC vs ANTONIO DE JESUS, TRUGREEN LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND KENNETH MICHAEL TAYLOR

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
FELICETTI LAW FIRM, PLLC,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D21-1531
LT Case No. 2019-CA-001453-O
ANTONIO DE JESUS, TRUGREEN
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND
KENNETH MICHAEL TAYLOR,
Appellees.
_____________________________/
Opinion filed July 8, 2022
Appeal from the Circuit Court
for Orange County,
Emerson R. Thompson, Jr., Senior Judge.
Nicholas A. Shannin and Carol B.
Shannin, of Shannin Law Firm, P.A.,
Orlando, for Appellant.
No Appearance for Appellees.
WOZNIAK, J.
The Felicetti Law Firm, PLLC (“the Firm”), former counsel for Appellee
Antonio De Jesus, appeals the order granting De Jesus’s motion to strike the
charging lien and deeming the lien waived as a sanction for the Firm’s
counsel’s actions. The Firm argues on appeal that the trial court abused its
discretion in striking its charging lien where no sanctionable conduct
occurred and, even if a sanction were appropriate, the ultimate sanction of
dismissal was too severe. Because no factual findings were made to support
the sanction, and because the record does not support the sanction imposed,
we must reverse. See Kozel v. Ostendorf, 629 So. 2d 817, 818 (Fla. 1993)
(listing factors to be considered, including whether counsel’s disobedience
was willful, deliberate, or contumacious, in determining whether dismissal is
warranted; observing that if a sanction less than dismissal is a viable
alternative, the lesser sanction should be employed). In light of the conduct
at issue, we remand to the trial court to consider whether lesser sanctions—
or any sanctions—are appropriate; any sanctions imposed must be
supported by written factual findings.
REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.
EDWARDS and HARRIS, JJ., concur.
2