How do two firms divide the fee on one case?

Two law firms have touched your injury case. Maybe you changed lawyers. Maybe the firm you hired sent the file to a bigger firm across the state and you only found out when a stranger called about your deposition. Either way, two sets of lawyers have a claim on one attorney fee, and you are the one whose settlement it comes out of.

Tell us about your case

or call 1-866-568-4913

The good news is that Florida does not leave this to the two firms to work out privately. The division is governed by a written rule, your written consent is required before any firm joins the fee, and at the end of the case you sign a document that itemizes exactly what each firm received.

Two different situations, two different rules

Almost every confusing answer on this subject comes from mixing up two things that look alike and are not. Before anything else, work out which one you are in.

Both firms are on the case. Your original lawyer brought in co-counsel, or referred the case while staying involved, or associated a trial firm for the litigation. Nobody was fired. Two firms are splitting one fee by agreement, and that agreement is what Rule 4-1.5(f)(4)(D) regulates — 75/25, with a court-approval route for an even split.

One firm replaced the other. You discharged the first firm and hired a new one. The first firm is out of your case. It is not a participant in the fee any more, and it does not get a percentage under the division rule. It has a quantum meruit claim — a claim for the reasonable value of the work it already did — governed by Rosenberg v. Levin and valued under Searcy, Denney.

The practical difference matters. In the first situation the split was agreed up front, in a contract you signed, with percentages fixed by the rule. In the second, no percentage is fixed by any rule: the amount is whatever the two firms agree on or a judge decides, bounded above by the first firm's own contract fee. A page that tells you a discharged firm "gets 25 percent" has merged the two and told you something the rule does not say.

What is the 75/25 rule in Florida attorney fees?

When lawyers who are not in the same firm divide a contingency fee in an injury case, the rule sets a floor and a ceiling. It reads:

"(i) To the lawyer assuming primary responsibility for the legal services on behalf of the client, a minimum of 75% of the total fee.

(ii) To the lawyer assuming secondary responsibility for the legal services on behalf of the client, a maximum of 25% of the total fee. Any fee in excess of 25% will be presumed to be clearly excessive."

R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-1.5(f)(4)(D)(i)–(ii)

Read the subject of those sentences carefully. The percentages are of the total fee, not of your settlement. The attorney fee is set first, by the percentage tiers in Rule 4-1.5(f)(4)(B) — typically 33 1/3 percent of a recovery up to $1 million before an answer is filed, 40 percent after. The 75/25 rule then divides that one fee between the firms. It does not add anything to it.

"Primary responsibility" is the firm actually running the case. "Secondary responsibility" is usually the referring firm. And the 25 percent ceiling has teeth: anything above it is presumed to be clearly excessive, which is the Bar's language for a fee a lawyer can be disciplined over.

One technical point that catches people reading their own closing statement: under subdivision (iv), the percentages "are applicable after deduction of any fee payable to separate counsel retained especially for appellate purposes." If an appellate lawyer was brought in, that fee comes off the top before the 75/25 math runs.

When can two firms split a fee more evenly than 75/25?

When they genuinely did comparable work — and only with a judge's permission. The rule's own words:

"The 25% limitation will not apply to those cases in which 2 or more lawyers or firms accept substantially equal active participation in the providing of legal services."

R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-1.5(f)(4)(D)(iii)

That exception is not self-executing. The firms have to go to court for it. The rule requires them to apply to the court where the case would be filed — or, if that court will not take the question, the circuit court where the cause of action arose — for authorization, "based on a sworn petition signed by all counsel that discloses in detail those services to be performed."

Three things in that provision are worth knowing as the client, because they are rights you hold without having to ask:

• You get served. The application "must contain a certificate showing service on the client." You are not supposed to learn about an even split from the closing statement.
• Approval is not a shield. "Authorization of the contract will not bar subsequent inquiry as to whether the fee actually claimed or charged is clearly excessive." A judge signing off on the division up front does not settle whether the fee charged at the end was reasonable.
• Your case does not stop while this happens. "Counsel may proceed with representation of the client pending court approval." The petition is a fee matter between the lawyers; it is not supposed to delay your claim.

The rule also sets the timing: the petition may be filed as a separate proceeding before suit, at the same time as the complaint, or "within 10 days of execution of a contract for division of fees when new counsel is engaged." That last clause is the one that touches a case where a firm comes in later.

No firm can join your fee without your written consent

This is the part most people do not know they have, and it is the strongest sentence in the whole rule:

"No lawyer or firm may participate in the fee without the consent of the client in writing. Each participating lawyer or law firm must sign the contract with the client and must agree to assume joint legal responsibility to the client for the performance of the services in question as if each were partners of the other lawyer or law firm involved."

R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-1.5(f)(2)

So a fee division is not something two firms can arrange between themselves and present to you afterward. Your written consent is a condition of any firm participating at all. And the second sentence is a benefit, not a formality: every firm in the fee is jointly responsible to you for the work, "as if each were partners." If the firm running your case drops the ball, the firm that referred it is answerable too.

Your signed Statement of Client's Rights says the same thing in plainer language. Item 4: "Before signing a contingent fee contract with you, a lawyer must advise you whether the lawyer intends to handle your case alone or whether other lawyers will be helping with the case," and "If lawyers from different law firms will represent you, at least 1 lawyer from each law firm must sign the contingent fee contract." Item 5 covers what happens if the referral comes later: "If your lawyer takes the case and later decides to refer it to another lawyer or to associate with other lawyers, you should sign a new contract that includes the new lawyers."

If a second firm has been working your case and you never signed anything bringing them in, that is not a paperwork quibble. In February 2025 the Florida Supreme Court found a lawyer guilty of violating this rule on facts that included exactly that. The Court described the requirement:

"Rule 4-1.5(f)(2) requires that an agreement to compensate a lawyer on a contingency fee basis be in writing and signed by the client and the lawyer and that each lawyer or law firm participating in a contingency fee sign the fee agreement with the client and agree to assume joint legal responsibility to the client."

The Florida Bar v. Charlie Easa Farah, Jr., No. SC2022-0472 (Fla. Feb. 27, 2025)

Among the findings the Court relied on: the lawyer "never obtained any of the clients' written consent" to the second lawyer participating in the eventual contingency fee. The Court found him guilty of violating Rule 4-1.5(f)(2) and sent the case back to the referee to decide the sanction.

How the split works when a new firm replaced the old one

Here the 75/25 rule is the wrong tool, because there is no agreed division to regulate. The old firm is not a participant in your fee. It is a former lawyer with a claim.

What it can claim is the reasonable value of the work it did before you discharged it, and no more than its own contract would ever have paid it:

"We hold that a lawyer discharged without cause is entitled to the reasonable value of his services on the basis of quantum meruit, but recovery is limited to the maximum fee set in the contract entered into for those services."

Rosenberg v. Levin, 409 So. 2d 1016, 1021 (Fla. 1982)

In a contingency case there is a second gate. The claim does not exist unless your case produces money: "in contingency fee cases, the cause of action for quantum meruit arises only upon the successful occurrence of the contingency. If the client fails in his recovery, the discharged attorney will similarly fail and recover nothing." Rosenberg, 409 So. 2d at 1022.

And the number is not a timesheet. The Florida Supreme Court was explicit that a quantum meruit award is measured differently from a prevailing-party fee award: "while the time reasonably devoted to the representation and a reasonable hourly rate are factors to be considered in determining a proper quantum meruit award, the court must consider all relevant factors surrounding the professional relationship to ensure that the award is fair to both the attorney and client." Searcy, Denney, Scarola, Barnhart & Shipley, P.A. v. Poletz, 652 So. 2d 366, 369 (Fla. 1995). Among those factors: "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."

In practice, most of these never reach a judge. The outgoing firm and the incoming firm agree on a number, and the agreement gets written into the closing statement. The Rosenberg cap is what the outgoing firm's negotiating position is bounded by, and the Searcy factors are what a judge would weigh if they could not agree. Either way, the total attorney fee does not grow because you changed lawyers.

What the arithmetic looks like

An illustration with round numbers. Not a real case, not a prediction, and not a settlement estimate — the point is the structure of the division, not the amounts.

Assume a case that settles for $240,000 before an answer was filed, with a 33 1/3 percent contingency fee and $9,000 in case costs.

Look at the fourth row. It is the same number in both columns, and that is the whole point of the structure: your share does not change depending on how the lawyers divide their end of it.

What if the old firm's contract did not follow the rule?

Then the contract may not be enforceable at all. In Chandris, S.A. v. Yanakakis, the Florida Supreme Court held that compliance with the contingency fee rule is a condition of enforceability:

"Thus, a contract that fails to adhere to these requirements is against public policy and is not enforceable by the member of The Florida Bar who has violated the rule."

Chandris, S.A. v. Yanakakis, 668 So. 2d 180, 186 (Fla. 1995)

Do not read that as a way out of paying anybody. The same opinion says, in a footnote, what the lawyer is left with: "Even though a member of The Florida Bar cannot claim fees based upon a noncomplying agreement, the attorney would still be entitled to the reasonable value of his or her services on the basis of quantum meruit." Chandris, 668 So. 2d at 186 n.4.

Worth noticing is what this does to the arithmetic. Rosenberg's cap is "the maximum fee set in the contract." If the contract is unenforceable, what the cap attaches to becomes a real question, and it is one for a lawyer with your documents in hand, not for a web page.

The closing statement, and your money while the firms argue

You do not have to take anyone's word for how the fee was divided. At the end of a contingency case the rule requires a document:

"In the event there is a recovery, on the conclusion of the representation, the lawyer must prepare 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. A copy of the closing statement must be executed by all participating lawyers, as well as the client, and each must receive a copy."

R. Regulating Fla. Bar 4-1.5(f)(5)

Per firm, itemized, signed by every lawyer and by you, with a copy to you. Each participating lawyer has to keep it for six years, and the rule makes both the contract and the closing statement available for your inspection at reasonable times.

Item 8 of your Statement of Client's Rights adds the leverage: "Until you approve the closing statement your lawyer cannot pay any money to anyone, including you, without an appropriate order of the court." And: "You also have the right to have every lawyer or law firm working on your case sign this closing statement." If the numbers do not reconcile, the moment to ask is before you sign — not after the money has moved.

That raises the question people actually lie awake over: if the two firms are fighting about the split, is your money frozen? Generally no. The trust accounting rule separates the disputed part from the rest:

"[T]he 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)

Your share is normally not what the firms are arguing about. They are arguing about how to divide the fee, which is their end. Under this rule the contested slice stays put and everything undisputed is distributed promptly.

What to ask before you sign with the next firm

Four questions, and you want the answers in writing.

1. Who will have primary responsibility, and will any other firm share this fee? If the answer is yes, ask for the percentage and ask to see it in the contract you sign. Rule 4-1.5(f)(2) means you have to consent in writing anyway.
2. How will the previous firm's claim be handled, and does it change what I receive? Under Rosenberg the total fee should not increase, but ask the firm to say so about your contract, in writing.
3. If the two firms cannot agree, who pays to resolve it, and does my distribution wait? Rule 5-1.1(f) says the undisputed portion is distributed promptly. Get the firm's own answer on how it handles that.
4. Will you give me the closing statement with every firm's fee itemized before I sign it? The rule requires it. A firm that hesitates here has told you something.

What is genuinely uncertain here

Three honest limits on what this page can tell you.

How the 75/25 rule interacts with a discharged firm's claim. The division rule governs "a division of any fee within subdivision (f)(4)" between lawyers in different firms. A discharged firm's quantum meruit claim is a different mechanism, decided under Rosenberg. Where the two firms settle that claim by agreeing on a share of the fee, which framework governs the number is a question to put to the attorney reviewing your file.

What the cap attaches to if the old contract was defective. It turns entirely on your specific documents, and on whether the first fee agreement complied with Rule 4-1.5(f) — which is why it is a question for the attorney who reads them.

What any of this produces in your case. The amount of a quantum meruit award is for the trial court, weighing the Searcy factors. Nobody can quote you a percentage in advance, and a firm that does is guessing.

Where to go from here

• If you change lawyers, do you pay two attorney fees? — the question underneath this one, and the holding that answers it.
• What an attorney's lien is and how it affects your settlement — how the old firm's claim is secured, and what it can reach.
• Your case was referred to another firm — what you agreed to, and what you did not.
• Case costs versus attorney fees — two different lines on the closing statement.
• If you think the fee was excessive — what the rule presumes, and where to take it.

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