In re the Estate of Stock
244 A.D.2d 939, 668 N.Y.S.2d 119, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12308
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 19, 1997·Published
Opinion
—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Surrogate’s Court properly denied petitioner’s request to disallow legal fees for respondent law firm. The record amply supports the court’s implicit finding that respondent was not discharged for cause (see, Kyle v Kyle, 94 AD2d 866, lv denied 60 NY2d 557; see also, Teiehner v W & J Holsteins, 64 NY2d 977, 978; Marschke v Cross, 82 AD2d 944). (Appeal from Order of Onondaga County Surrogate’s Court, Wells, S.—Attorney’s Fees.) Present—Pine, J. P., Hayes, Callahan and Doerr, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
In re the Estate of Stock, 244 A.D.2d 939, 668 N.Y.S.2d 119, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12308 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).
244 A.D.2d 939 (In re the Estate of Stock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Teichner v. W & J Holsteins, Inc.
478 N.E.2d 177 (New York Court of Appeals, 1985)
Marschke v. Cross
82 A.D.2d 944 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1981)
Kyle v. Kyle
94 A.D.2d 866 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)