Bernstein v. Suchoff

242 A.D. 784
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 15, 1934·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Order modified by directing that the payment to be made to Jacobs shall be “ from the proceeds of the action ” and further modified by providing that, subject to the lien of Jacobs upon the proceeds of the action, the new attorney be substituted for him and that he turn over all papers to that new attorney. As thus modified the order is affirmed, without costs. The order improperly provided that the substitution of attorneys should be contingent upon the present payment of a sum of money. All the former attorney was entitled to was a lien upon the proceeds of the action in an amount representing the reasonable value of his services as of the date when he was superseded by the new attorney. The amount fixed at Special Term was proper. (Matter of Lydig, 262 N. Y. 408.) Lazansky, P. J.', Kapper, Hagarty, Carswell and Davis, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Bernstein v. Suchoff, 242 A.D. 784 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

242 A.D. 784 (Bernstein v. Suchoff) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Carroll v. Seiki Miyashiro
441 P.2d 638 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1968)
Marrello v. Caputo
4 A.D.2d 768 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1957)
Friedman v. Gordon
260 A.D. 1023 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1940)
Fitzsimmons v. Long Island Lighting Co.
251 A.D. 395 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1937)