Edelstein v. Pirrotti

267 A.D.2d 348, 699 N.Y.S.2d 908, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13159
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Edelstein v. Pirrotti. Read the opinion of the Court — 286 A.D.2d 660

Opinion

—In an action to recover legal fees pursuant to an alleged fee-sharing agreement, the defendants appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Rosato, J.), entered October 23, 1998, as denied their motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment (see generally, Benjamin v Koeppel, 85 NY2d 549, 556; Stinnett v Sears Roebuck & Co., 201 AD2d 362). Thompson, J. P., Joy, Krausman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

Edelstein v. Pirrotti, 267 A.D.2d 348, 699 N.Y.S.2d 908, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13159 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

267 A.D.2d 348 (Edelstein v. Pirrotti) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Benjamin v. Koeppel
650 N.E.2d 829 (New York Court of Appeals, 1995)
Stinnett v. Sears Roebuck & Co.
201 A.D.2d 362 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)