Kaplan v. Reuss

New York Court of Appeals

Kaplan v. Reuss

497 N.E.2d 671, 68 N.Y.2d 693, 506 N.Y.S.2d 304, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 19471

New York Court of Appeals·Decided July 1, 1986·Published·Cited by 27 cases

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] lien 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

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] lien 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.

Kaplan v. Reuss, 497 N.E.2d 671, 68 N.Y.2d 693, 506 N.Y.S.2d 304, 1986 N.Y. LEXIS 19471 (N.Y. 1986).

Pincite

497 N.E.2d 671 (Kaplan v. Reuss) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related