Mazzoni v. Central Elevator, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mazzoni v. Central Elevator, Inc.

17 A.D.3d 198, 792 N.Y.S.2d 331, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3953

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

DecidedApril 14, 2005

StatusPublished

This text of 17 A.D.3d 198 (Mazzoni v. Central Elevator, Inc.) 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

Mazzoni v. Central Elevator, Inc., 17 A.D.3d 198, 792 N.Y.S.2d 331, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3953 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Sallie Manzanet, J.), entered July 22, 2004, which directed the outgoing attorney to turn over his complete file in this matter to plaintiff without imposing a retaining hen, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Appellant was discharged by plaintiff after the underlying negligence action was dismissed on statute of limitations grounds. During the pendency of the motion to dismiss, after having requested several adjournments, and after having failed to respond to his client’s attempt to change attorneys, appellant moved to be relieved without advising the court that his client had already sought to discharge him. Ultimately, he was [199]*199relieved. When plaintiff subsequently moved for an order directing appellant to turn over the file, the latter sought judicial imposition of a common-law retaining lien.

Under the circumstances of this case, the court providently exercised its discretion in refusing to impose a lien. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Sallie Manzanet, J.), entered July 22, 2004, which directed the outgoing attorney to turn over his complete file in this matter to plaintiff without imposing a retaining hen, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Appellant was discharged by plaintiff after the underlying negligence action was dismissed on statute of limitations grounds. During the pendency of the motion to dismiss, after having requested several adjournments, and after having failed to respond to his client’s attempt to change attorneys, appellant moved to be relieved without advising the court that his client had already sought to discharge him. Ultimately, he was [199]*199relieved. When plaintiff subsequently moved for an order directing appellant to turn over the file, the latter sought judicial imposition of a common-law retaining lien.

Under the circumstances of this case, the court providently exercised its discretion in refusing to impose a lien. Concur— Mazzarelli, J.P., Andrias, Friedman, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 A.D.3d 198, 792 N.Y.S.2d 331, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3953, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mazzoni-v-central-elevator-inc-nyappdiv-2005.