In re O'Leary

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In re O'Leary

45 A.D.2d 725, 356 N.Y.S.2d 640, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4768

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided June 10, 1974·Published

Opinion

In a proceeding to compel payment of $50,000 to petitioner for services rendered by him as an attorney-tax specialist (petitioner was appointed by an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 30, 1969, to render such services on behalf of the incompetent person herein), petitioner' appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered September 18, 1973, which fixed the amount of the compensation to be paid at $3,500. Order modified, on the facts, by changing the amount of the compensation to $30,000. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. It is undisputed that appellant rendered services which were “ expert ” in every sense of the word and he should be compensated accordingly (see [726] Matter of Potts, 213 App. Div. 59). By his expertise he saved the committee a substantial sum in taxes and he rendered services over an extended period of time to accomplish the result. Gulotta, P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding to compel payment of $50,000 to petitioner for services rendered by him as an attorney-tax specialist (petitioner was appointed by an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated June 30, 1969, to render such services on behalf of the incompetent person herein), petitioner' appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered September 18, 1973, which fixed the amount of the compensation to be paid at $3,500. Order modified, on the facts, by changing the amount of the compensation to $30,000. As so modified, order affirmed, without costs. It is undisputed that appellant rendered services which were “ expert ” in every sense of the word and he should be compensated accordingly (see [726] Matter of Potts, 213 App. Div. 59). By his expertise he saved the committee a substantial sum in taxes and he rendered services over an extended period of time to accomplish the result. Gulotta, P. J., Latham, Cohalan, Benjamin and Munder, JJ., concur.

In re O'Leary, 45 A.D.2d 725, 356 N.Y.S.2d 640, 1974 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 4768 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

45 A.D.2d 725 (In re O'Leary) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related