Parker Duryee Rosoff & Haft v. Ehrlich

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Parker Duryee Rosoff & Haft v. Ehrlich

208 A.D.2d 411, 618 N.Y.S.2d 210, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9643

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 13, 1994·Published

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick, J.), entered on or about June 30, 1993, which, inter alia, awarded petitioner $150,000 in additional legal fees, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The court properly rejected in part the findings of the Special Referee. The additional attorneys’ fees awarded to petitioner were warranted in light of the considerable work performed by petitioner for the benefit of respondent, who ultimately was awarded an equitable distribution of approximately $2 million (Haskin v Mendler, 184 AD2d 372, 373). Concur—Wallach, J. P., Kupferman, Ross, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick, J.), entered on or about June 30, 1993, which, inter alia, awarded petitioner $150,000 in additional legal fees, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The court properly rejected in part the findings of the Special Referee. The additional attorneys’ fees awarded to petitioner were warranted in light of the considerable work performed by petitioner for the benefit of respondent, who ultimately was awarded an equitable distribution of approximately $2 million (Haskin v Mendler, 184 AD2d 372, 373). Concur—Wallach, J. P., Kupferman, Ross, Nardelli and Williams, JJ.

Parker Duryee Rosoff & Haft v. Ehrlich, 208 A.D.2d 411, 618 N.Y.S.2d 210, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9643 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

208 A.D.2d 411 (Parker Duryee Rosoff & Haft v. Ehrlich) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related