Jaspan, Ginsberg, Ehrlich, Schlesinger & Hoffman v. Ehrlich

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Jaspan, Ginsberg, Ehrlich, Schlesinger & Hoffman v. Ehrlich

188 A.D.2d 585, 592 N.Y.S.2d 610, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14486

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

DecidedDecember 21, 1992

StatusPublished

This text of 188 A.D.2d 585 (Jaspan, Ginsberg, Ehrlich, Schlesinger & Hoffman v. Ehrlich) 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

Jaspan, Ginsberg, Ehrlich, Schlesinger & Hoffman v. Ehrlich, 188 A.D.2d 585, 592 N.Y.S.2d 610, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14486 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover unpaid legal fees, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roncallo, J.), dated May 23, 1990, which was in favor of the plaintiff and against him in the principal sum of $17,116.42.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in failing to vacate an order of preclusion (see, Hoffman v Sno Haus Ski Shops, 185 AD2d 874) or in granting the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). Thompson, J. P., Balletta, Rosenblatt and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover unpaid legal fees, the defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Roncallo, J.), dated May 23, 1990, which was in favor of the plaintiff and against him in the principal sum of $17,116.42.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in failing to vacate an order of preclusion (see, Hoffman v Sno Haus Ski Shops, 185 AD2d 874) or in granting the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment (see, Zuckerman v City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562). Thompson, J. P., Balletta, Rosenblatt and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 A.D.2d 585, 592 N.Y.S.2d 610, 1992 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14486, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jaspan-ginsberg-ehrlich-schlesinger-hoffman-v-ehrlich-nyappdiv-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack