Donato v. Gritz

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Donato v. Gritz

104 A.D.2d 1025, 480 N.Y.S.2d 881, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20461

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedOctober 29, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 104 A.D.2d 1025 (Donato v. Gritz) 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.

Bluebook

Donato v. Gritz, 104 A.D.2d 1025, 480 N.Y.S.2d 881, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20461 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action to recover damages for legal malpractice, defendants appeal, as limited by their briefs, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lodato, J.), dated March 12, 1984, as denied those branches of their respective motions which sought to disqualify plaintiff’s attorney from representing him in the instant action.

Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Considering the totality of the circumstances, including the lack of demonstrable prejudice to defendants, we conclude that there is no basis to disqualify plaintiff’s counsel (see Lopez v Precision Papers, 99 AD2d 507). Brown, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

— In an action to recover damages for legal malpractice, defendants appeal, as limited by their briefs, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Lodato, J.), dated March 12, 1984, as denied those branches of their respective motions which sought to disqualify plaintiff’s attorney from representing him in the instant action.

Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

Considering the totality of the circumstances, including the lack of demonstrable prejudice to defendants, we conclude that there is no basis to disqualify plaintiff’s counsel (see Lopez v Precision Papers, 99 AD2d 507). Brown, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

104 A.D.2d 1025, 480 N.Y.S.2d 881, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 20461, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/donato-v-gritz-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack