Loeb Rhoades & Co. v. De Vries

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Loeb Rhoades & Co. v. De Vries

50 A.D.2d 552, 375 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12290

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

DecidedNovember 25, 1975

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 50 A.D.2d 552 (Loeb Rhoades & Co. v. De Vries) 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

Loeb Rhoades & Co. v. De Vries, 50 A.D.2d 552, 375 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12290 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered August 5, 1975, unanimously affirmed, with $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal to respondent. Plaintiff-respondent moved for summary judgment against defendant. Movant-appellant, attorney for defendant — the latter described by plaintiff as a fugitive from criminal process, and who has removed himself from this jurisdiction —countered the summary judgment motion with his own application for leave to withdraw, claiming a dispute with his absent client over fees. Special Term denied the application, observing that the past history of the case shows counsel to be able to prepare papers in opposition to the summary judgment motion, and that withdrawal could serve only to prejudice plaintiff’s rights. We agree. The date by which movant-appellant attorney may serve and file papers in opposition to the motion for summary judgment is extended for 15 days from service of a copy of the order entered hereon. Concur — Markewich, J. P., Kupferman, Capozzoli, Lane and Nunez, JJ.

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

— Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered August 5, 1975, unanimously affirmed, with $40 costs and disbursements of this appeal to respondent. Plaintiff-respondent moved for summary judgment against defendant. Movant-appellant, attorney for defendant — the latter described by plaintiff as a fugitive from criminal process, and who has removed himself from this jurisdiction —countered the summary judgment motion with his own application for leave to withdraw, claiming a dispute with his absent client over fees. Special Term denied the application, observing that the past history of the case shows counsel to be able to prepare papers in opposition to the summary judgment motion, and that withdrawal could serve only to prejudice plaintiff’s rights. We agree. The date by which movant-appellant attorney may serve and file papers in opposition to the motion for summary judgment is extended for 15 days from service of a copy of the order entered hereon. Concur — Markewich, J. P., Kupferman, Capozzoli, Lane and Nunez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

50 A.D.2d 552, 375 N.Y.S.2d 1022, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12290, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loeb-rhoades-co-v-de-vries-nyappdiv-1975.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack