Kaplan v. Reuss
This text of 497 N.E.2d 671 (Kaplan v. Reuss) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Order affirmed, with costs. We agree with the Appellate Division, for the reasons stated in the opinion by Justice Leon D. Lazer, that plaintiff is not entitled to enforce his attorney’s charging lien on the proceeds of the life insurance policy. Although plaintiff was not required to assert a counterclaim in prior litigation, by otherwise failing to timely assert the [695]*695lien within a reasonable time after it attached, plaintiff waived his right to enforce the lien as a matter of law (see, Todd v Mutual Factors, 3 AD2d 537, 546, affd 4 NY2d 759).
Concur: Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Meyer, Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone and Hancock, Jr.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
497 N.E.2d 671, 68 N.Y.2d 693, 506 N.Y.S.2d 304, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 19471, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kaplan-v-reuss-ny-1986.