CK PRIVE GROUP 1800, LLC, vs DIAZ, REUS & TARG, LLP,
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed December 1, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D20-1717 Lower Tribunal No. 20-1663 ________________ CK Prive Group 1800, LLC, Appellant, vs. Diaz, Reus & Targ, LLP, Appellee. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, William Thomas, Judge. Jones & Adams, P.A., and W. Steven Adams, Matthew L. Jones, Jorge E. Porro and Daniel Haydar; Levy & Partners, PLLC, and Ely R. Levy and Omar Salazar II (Hollywood), for appellant. Diaz, Reus & Targ, LLP, and Michael Diaz, Jr., Ahmand Johnson and Zhen Pan, for appellee. Before SCALES, HENDON and MILLER, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Dadic v. Schneider, 722 So. 2d 921, 923 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (recognizing that “[n]o authority supports a cause of action” for charging an excessive legal fee); Pressley v. Farley, 579 So. 2d 160, 161 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (stating that a violation of the Florida Rules of Professional Conduct governing a lawyer’s responsibilities neither creates a legal duty on the part of the lawyer nor gives rise to a cause of action); Salit v. Ruden McClosky, Smith, Schuster & Russell, P.A., 742 So. 2d 381, 389 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (“An attorney who represents a corporation is ‘not in privity with and therefore owes no separate duty of diligence and care to an individual shareholder absent special circumstances or an agreement to also represent the shareholder individually.’” (quoting Brennan v. Ruffner, 640 So. 2d 143, 146 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994))). 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
