(1) Whoever gives, promises, offers or conspires to give, promise, or offer, to anyone any bribe, money, goods, presents, reward, or any valuable thing whatsoever with the intent and purpose of stirring up strife and litigation; or with intent and purpose of assisting, seeking out, influencing, or advising the accused, sick, injured, uninformed, or others to bring suit or seek professional legal services or advice, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(2) Whoever, in any way, solicits, receives or accepts or agrees to receive or accept, or who conspires to receive or accept, any bribe, money, goods, presents, reward, or any valuable thing whatsoever, or any promise, contract, or agreement whatsoever, with the intent and purpose of stirring up strife and litigation; or with the intent or purpose of seeking out, influencing, assisting, or advising the accused, sick, injured, uninformed, or others to bring suit, or seek professional legal services, counsel, or advice, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.
(3) Any person violating the provisions of this section shall not be privileged from testifying, but if the person does testify in response to a subpoena issued by the state attorney or court having jurisdiction of such offense, nothing said by the person in his or her testimony shall be admissible in any civil or criminal action against him or her, nor shall the person be subjected to any penalty or forfeiture for or on account of any such testimony or evidence so given or produced.
(4) Nothing herein shall apply to the division of legal fees by and between attorneys at law.
(5) This section shall be taken to be cumulative and shall not be construed to amend or repeal any other valid law, code, ordinance, rule, or penalty now in effect.
McCORD, Acting Chief Judge. Appellants appeal an order dismissing with prejudice their amended complaint as to appellee/Schroff contending that a civil cause of action exists against him for solicitation of maintenance in violation of Section 877.01(2), Florida Statutes (1977), a criminal statute....
...Appellants’ contention is that appel-lee/Schroff, a plaintiff in an earlier suit, successfully solicited funds from a labor union for the legal fees and costs of prosecution of the earlier suit although the labor union was not a party to, but rather was a stranger to, the earlier suit in violation of § 877.01, Florida Statutes....
...While a civil action to recover damages for maintenance did lie at common law, we have found no common law action for solicitation of maintenance nor has authority for such an action been cited to us. Appellants contend that, by virtue of the common law, a civil action for maintenance exists in Florida and § 877.01(2), Florida Statutes (1977), has the effect of expanding the maintenance action to include solicitation of maintenance....
...party-plaintiff in the prior lawsuit and, thus, could not be characterized as an intermeddler or stranger to that action. See Harry Pepper & Associates, Inc. v. Lasseter, 247 So.2d 736 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1971). Appellants contend, as aforesaid, that § 877.01(2), Florida Statutes (1977), expands the common law action of maintenance into a civil cause of action for solicitation of maintenance. Not only is no authority cited for this position, but the legislative intent, as expressed in the statute itself, indicates a contrary intent. § 877.01(5) states as follows: “This section shall be taken to be cumulative and shall not be construed to amend or repeal any other valid law, code, ordinance, rule, or penalty now in effect.” AFFIRMED....
This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham W. Syfert, Esq., a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.
