Labelle v. Berenson LLP
A client sued his former law firm for legal malpractice; the firm moved to compel arbitration under the arbitration clause in a mid-representation fee agreement that contained none of the bold-print notice required by Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 4-1.5(i). The Third DCA reversed the order compelling arbitration, holding the arbitration provision unenforceable on its face regardless of the type of dispute, and declined to sever the invalid portion.
Key facts
- Client sued his former law firm for legal malpractice; the firm moved to compel arbitration based on an arbitration clause in a mid-representation fee agreement.
- The fee agreement contained an arbitration provision but entirely omitted the bold-print notice required by Rule Regulating the Florida Bar 4-1.5(i) advising the client to consider independent counsel.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
The Third DCA aligns with the Fourth District's Owens v. Corrigan, confirming that a fee agreement's total omission of the Rule 4-1.5(i) notice voids the entire arbitration clause — not just as to fee disputes, but as… — full analysis with a trial
Read the full opinion, holdings & search — free for 30 days
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision — in your hands.
- Search every tracked Florida decision in seconds
- Save, tag & file the cases that matter into your own library
- Read the full plain-English analysis and holdings
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.