Marine Midland Bank, N. A. v. Sprecher

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Marine Midland Bank, N. A. v. Sprecher

169 A.D.2d 544, 565 N.Y.S.2d 702, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 489

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

DecidedJanuary 22, 1991

StatusPublished

This text of 169 A.D.2d 544 (Marine Midland Bank, N. A. v. Sprecher) 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

Marine Midland Bank, N. A. v. Sprecher, 169 A.D.2d 544, 565 N.Y.S.2d 702, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 489 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Fingerhood, J.), entered January 23, 1990, which, on an assessment without a jury, awarded plaintiff counsel fees and disbursements in the amount of $19,711.09, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The counsel fees awarded were fully justified by evidence submitted at the assessment hearing, where defendant had sufficient opportunity to cross-examine plaintiff’s witness and challenge the computation. The fact that the fee was high in relation to the underlying judgment was a result of defendant’s own extensive legal maneuverings, in what should

[545]*545concededly have been a simple matter. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Wallach, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Fingerhood, J.), entered January 23, 1990, which, on an assessment without a jury, awarded plaintiff counsel fees and disbursements in the amount of $19,711.09, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The counsel fees awarded were fully justified by evidence submitted at the assessment hearing, where defendant had sufficient opportunity to cross-examine plaintiff’s witness and challenge the computation. The fact that the fee was high in relation to the underlying judgment was a result of defendant’s own extensive legal maneuverings, in what should

[545]*545concededly have been a simple matter. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Wallach, Kupferman and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 A.D.2d 544, 565 N.Y.S.2d 702, 1991 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 489, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marine-midland-bank-n-a-v-sprecher-nyappdiv-1991.