Brauner Baron Rosenzweig & Klein, LLP v. Roth
This text of 25 A.D.3d 333 (Brauner Baron Rosenzweig & Klein, LLP v. Roth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Jane Goodman, J.), entered April 22, 2005, which denied plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment on its cause of action for an account stated, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The record discloses factual issues as to whether there was any underlying relationship between the parties pursuant to which defendant was obligated to pay the legal fees at issue. We note that no written retainer or fee agreement was submitted by plaintiff and it appears that most of the services for which payment is sought by plaintiff were rendered on behalf of a cli[334]*334ent other than defendant (see Leboeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae, L.L.P. v Worsham, 185 F3d 61 [1999]; Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft v Klear, 303 AD2d 204 [2003]). Concur— Tom, J.P., Andrias, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
25 A.D.3d 333, 805 N.Y.S.2d 829, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brauner-baron-rosenzweig-klein-llp-v-roth-nyappdiv-2006.