Garcia v. City of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Garcia v. City of New York

260 A.D.2d 346, 686 N.Y.S.2d 324, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3567

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

DecidedApril 5, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 260 A.D.2d 346 (Garcia v. City of New York) 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

Garcia v. City of New York, 260 A.D.2d 346, 686 N.Y.S.2d 324, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3567 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice, Bernard Duhan, P. C., former counsel for the infant plaintiff Angel Garcia, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Clemente, J.), dated December 3, 1997, which denied its motion, in effect, to modify an infant compromise order dated October 24, 1994, by increasing the counsel fee awarded to him in that order.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Under the circumstances, the counsel fees awarded were [347]*347suitable compensation for the services rendered on behalf of the infant plaintiff (see, Judiciary Law § 474; see also, Banks v Lindenbaum, 201 AD2d 523; Milano v Cornwall Hosp., 160 AD2d 782; cf., Muzroll v Wilson, 173 AD2d 447; Alster v Martinique Leasing Corp., 59 AD2d 930). O’Brien, J. P., Friedmann, Florio and McGinity, 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 medical malpractice, Bernard Duhan, P. C., former counsel for the infant plaintiff Angel Garcia, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Clemente, J.), dated December 3, 1997, which denied its motion, in effect, to modify an infant compromise order dated October 24, 1994, by increasing the counsel fee awarded to him in that order.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Under the circumstances, the counsel fees awarded were [347]*347suitable compensation for the services rendered on behalf of the infant plaintiff (see, Judiciary Law § 474; see also, Banks v Lindenbaum, 201 AD2d 523; Milano v Cornwall Hosp., 160 AD2d 782; cf., Muzroll v Wilson, 173 AD2d 447; Alster v Martinique Leasing Corp., 59 AD2d 930). O’Brien, J. P., Friedmann, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

260 A.D.2d 346, 686 N.Y.S.2d 324, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3567, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/garcia-v-city-of-new-york-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack