Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison v. Westergaard
This text of 551 N.E.2d 97 (Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison v. Westergaard) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs.
This is an action to recover for legal services. The plaintiff law firm billed its client, a limited partnership, for a fee, a portion of which the limited partnership paid. The effort in this action to recover the balance of the fee from the individual shareholder of a corporate participant in the limited partnership must be rejected. It is not supported by any evidence of an enforceable independent promise by the individual to pay the limited partnership’s obligation and is clearly barred by the Statute of Frauds (General Obligations Law § 5-701 [a] [2]; Martin Roofing v Goldstein, 60 NY2d 262, 267-268).
Chief Judge Wachtler and Judges Simons, Kaye, Alexander, Titone, Hancock, Jr., and Bellacosa concur.
Order affirmed, with costs, in a memorandum.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
551 N.E.2d 97, 75 N.Y.2d 755, 551 N.Y.S.2d 896, 1989 N.Y. LEXIS 4389, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/paul-weiss-rifkind-wharton-garrison-v-westergaard-ny-1989.