Marschke v. Cross

82 A.D.2d 944, 440 N.Y.S.2d 740, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14674
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 4, 1981
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 82 A.D.2d 944 (Marschke v. Cross) 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
Marschke v. Cross, 82 A.D.2d 944, 440 N.Y.S.2d 740, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14674 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term (Soden, J.), entered August 6, 1980 in Essex County, which granted plaintiff’s motion to compel her former attorney to turn over her legal file upon condition his fee, fixed without a hearing, be paid or otherwise secured. Plaintiff discharged her former attorney because she was dissatisfied with his services. A hearing to determine whether he was discharged with or without cause, and if the latter, to determine the amount of his compensation, must be held. If a discharge for cause or misconduct is shown, than the outgoing attorney has no right to á fee nor to a retaining lien (Matter of Weitling, 266 NY 184; Williams v Hertz Corp., 75 AD2d 766). If his discharge was without cause, the amount of his compensation is to be determined on a quantum meruit basis (Matter of Shaad, 59 AD2d 1061). Since plaintiff’s intestate’s injury action was not fully brought to conclusion prior to his discharge, the outgoing attorney is not entitled to compensation on the basis of the parties’ contingent fee arrangement (Govern & McDowell v McDowell & Walker, 75 AD2d 979). Order reversed, on the law and the facts, with costs, and plaintiff’s former attorney is directed to turn over his file to plaintiff’s present attorneys forthwith; matter remitted to Special Term for a hearing to determine whether plaintiff’s former attorney was discharged with or without cause, and if the latter, to determine the amount of his compensation, with payment to be deferred and made from the proceeds recovered from the injury action. Sweeney, J. P., Main, Mikoll, Yesawich, Jr., and Herlihy, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Rotker v. Rotker
195 Misc. 2d 768 (New York Supreme Court, 2003)
Living Springs Retreat v. County of Putnam
248 A.D.2d 681 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998)
In re the Estate of Stock
244 A.D.2d 939 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1997)
Allyn v. AlLyn
163 A.D.2d 665 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1990)
Katsaros v. Katsaros
152 A.D.2d 539 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1989)
Teichner v. W & J Holsteins, Inc.
478 N.E.2d 177 (New York Court of Appeals, 1985)
Artim v. Artim
109 A.D.2d 811 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
Fields v. Leeponis
95 A.D.2d 822 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
Kyle v. Kyle
94 A.D.2d 866 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
82 A.D.2d 944, 440 N.Y.S.2d 740, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14674, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marschke-v-cross-nyappdiv-1981.