Gibbs v. Dweck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Gibbs v. Dweck

52 A.D.2d 801, 383 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12599

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

DecidedMay 18, 1976

StatusPublished

This text of 52 A.D.2d 801 (Gibbs v. Dweck) 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

Gibbs v. Dweck, 52 A.D.2d 801, 383 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12599 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on May 8, 1975, denying plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $60 costs and disbursements to appellant, and the motion granted. The mortgage on the premises 2120 St. Paul’s Avenue, Bronx County, held by defendant, should be vacated as it does not secure any indebtedness. The retainer agreement drawn by defendant attorney provides in pertinent part as follows: "In the event that you are not successful in vacating the judgment or the lien, as aforementioned, then my liability to you for legal services shall be only in the sum of $800. paid to you”. Defendant admittedly received $800. While he was successful at the trial level, the Appellate Division reversed and the Court of Appeals affirmed such reversal. Hence, defendant was paid all that he was entitled to and no debt exists. There is no specific language in the agreement indicating the contrary. The language in the retainer agreement that "The aforementioned retainer shall not include any services you may render in connection with any appeal in this proceeding’’ merely means that defendant would be entitled to an additional fee for appellate services, and, not, as urged by him that, "I was to be paid the contingency if I was successful in the trial court”. Settle order on notice. Concur—Stevens, P. J., Markewich, Murphy, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County, entered on May 8, 1975, denying plaintiffs motion for summary judgment, unanimously reversed, on the law, with $60 costs and disbursements to appellant, and the motion granted. The mortgage on the premises 2120 St. Paul’s Avenue, Bronx County, held by defendant, should be vacated as it does not secure any indebtedness. The retainer agreement drawn by defendant attorney provides in pertinent part as follows: "In the event that you are not successful in vacating the judgment or the lien, as aforementioned, then my liability to you for legal services shall be only in the sum of $800. paid to you”. Defendant admittedly received $800. While he was successful at the trial level, the Appellate Division reversed and the Court of Appeals affirmed such reversal. Hence, defendant was paid all that he was entitled to and no debt exists. There is no specific language in the agreement indicating the contrary. The language in the retainer agreement that "The aforementioned retainer shall not include any services you may render in connection with any appeal in this proceeding’’ merely means that defendant would be entitled to an additional fee for appellate services, and, not, as urged by him that, "I was to be paid the contingency if I was successful in the trial court”. Settle order on notice. Concur—Stevens, P. J., Markewich, Murphy, Capozzoli and Lane, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

52 A.D.2d 801, 383 N.Y.S.2d 349, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12599, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gibbs-v-dweck-nyappdiv-1976.