Paramount Communications Inc. v. Horsehead Industries, Inc.

287 A.D.2d 345, 731 N.Y.S.2d 433, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9676
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedOctober 18, 2001
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 287 A.D.2d 345 (Paramount Communications Inc. v. Horsehead Industries, 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
Paramount Communications Inc. v. Horsehead Industries, Inc., 287 A.D.2d 345, 731 N.Y.S.2d 433, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9676 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered May 16, 2000, which, in an action seeking indemnification of certain litigation costs and liabilities [346]*346incurred in other actions, and to recover the reasonable value of plaintiffs attorneys’ fees, and the costs and disbursements incurred in this action, granted plaintiffs motion to have such value, costs and disbursements determined by the court, without a jury, after the trial to determine the amount of plaintiffs other damages, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

We are in accord with McGuire v Russell Miller, Inc. (1 F3d 1306, 1313 [2d Cir]) insofar as it holds that when a contract provides for an award of attorneys’ fees, there is no right to a jury trial on the issue of the reasonable value of such fees. The amount of, if not the right to, attorneys’ fees raises post-judgment issues collateral to the merits in the nature of an accounting that are essentially equitable in nature (see, id., at 1315-1316; cf., Kaplan v Long Is. Univ., 116 AD2d 508, 509). The foregoing is not to be understood to hold that there is no right to a jury trial on the issue of the reasonable value of an attorney’s fees in an action by an attorney against a former client to recover fees (see, id., at 1313; Livingston v Blumenthal, 248 App Div 138). Concur — Williams, J. P., Buckley, Friedman and Marlow, JJ.

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

Related

Kalamata Capital Group, LLC v. Colorado Trailers, Inc.
2025 NY Slip Op 31502(U) (New York Supreme Court, Erie County, 2025)
In Re: The Bourne Law Office, PLLC
2024 V.I. 31 (Supreme Court of The Virgin Islands, 2024)
United Prairie Bank-Mountain Lake v. Haugen Nutrition & Equipment, LLC
813 N.W.2d 49 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 2012)
Prospect Energy Corp. v. Dallas Gas Partners, LP
761 F. Supp. 2d 579 (S.D. Texas, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
287 A.D.2d 345, 731 N.Y.S.2d 433, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9676, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paramount-communications-inc-v-horsehead-industries-inc-nyappdiv-2001.