Lopresti v. Ingenito

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Lopresti v. Ingenito

250 A.D.2d 650, 671 N.Y.S.2d 694, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5530

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

DecidedMay 11, 1998

StatusPublished

This text of 250 A.D.2d 650 (Lopresti v. Ingenito) 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

Lopresti v. Ingenito, 250 A.D.2d 650, 671 N.Y.S.2d 694, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5530 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, nonparty Bert Taras, P. C., the plaintiffs former attorney, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.), dated June 2, 1997, which, after a hearing, awarded it only 28% of the total legal fees to be received by the plaintiffs attorneys.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Supreme Court did not err in awarding it, as the plaintiffs former attorney, only 28% of the total legal fees to be received by the plaintiffs attorneys (see, Matter of Cohen v Grainger, Tesoriero & Bell, 81 NY2d 655). Thompson, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein and Luciano, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, nonparty Bert Taras, P. C., the plaintiffs former attorney, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Barasch, J.), dated June 2, 1997, which, after a hearing, awarded it only 28% of the total legal fees to be received by the plaintiffs attorneys.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the appellant’s contention, the Supreme Court did not err in awarding it, as the plaintiffs former attorney, only 28% of the total legal fees to be received by the plaintiffs attorneys (see, Matter of Cohen v Grainger, Tesoriero & Bell, 81 NY2d 655). Thompson, J. P., Krausman, Goldstein and Luciano, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

250 A.D.2d 650, 671 N.Y.S.2d 694, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5530, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lopresti-v-ingenito-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack