Ganer, Grossbach & Ganer, P.C. v. Breitbart

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ganer, Grossbach & Ganer, P.C. v. Breitbart

293 A.D.2d 369, 741 N.Y.S.2d 517, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3998

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

DecidedApril 23, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 293 A.D.2d 369 (Ganer, Grossbach & Ganer, P.C. v. Breitbart) 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

Ganer, Grossbach & Ganer, P.C. v. Breitbart, 293 A.D.2d 369, 741 N.Y.S.2d 517, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3998 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered June 21, 2001, after a nonjury trial, in an action by an accounting firm to recover a fee, in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the principal amount of $63,888.90, plus interest, costs and disbursements, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendant admits that he never objected to plaintiff’s detailed monthly bills, and his claim that the bills were padded by various fraudulent billing practices, including rounding up to the nearest 15-minute interval and reallocating administrative time as billable time, lacks evidentiary support, and indeed was largely refuted by his own witness, a former employee of plaintiff and defendant’s present accountant. Accordingly, plaintiff is entitled to judgment on the theory of account stated (see, Morrison Cohen Singer & Weinstein v Ackerman, 280 AD2d 355). Nor should the judgment be reduced to reflect the amount of the bills in the record that do not have time sheets attached, there being unrefuted evidence that it was plaintiffs regular practice to attach a “back up” statement to each of its bills, and an admission by defendant that he never personally reviewed either plaintiffs bills or the back-up. Concur—Williams, P.J., Mazzarelli, Saxe., Lerner and Marlow, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered June 21, 2001, after a nonjury trial, in an action by an accounting firm to recover a fee, in favor of plaintiff and against defendant in the principal amount of $63,888.90, plus interest, costs and disbursements, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Defendant admits that he never objected to plaintiff’s detailed monthly bills, and his claim that the bills were padded by various fraudulent billing practices, including rounding up to the nearest 15-minute interval and reallocating administrative time as billable time, lacks evidentiary support, and indeed was largely refuted by his own witness, a former employee of plaintiff and defendant’s present accountant. Accordingly, plaintiff is entitled to judgment on the theory of account stated (see, Morrison Cohen Singer & Weinstein v Ackerman, 280 AD2d 355). Nor should the judgment be reduced to reflect the amount of the bills in the record that do not have time sheets attached, there being unrefuted evidence that it was plaintiffs regular practice to attach a “back up” statement to each of its bills, and an admission by defendant that he never personally reviewed either plaintiffs bills or the back-up. Concur—Williams, P.J., Mazzarelli, Saxe., Lerner and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

293 A.D.2d 369, 741 N.Y.S.2d 517, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3998, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ganer-grossbach-ganer-pc-v-breitbart-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack