Pomerantz v. Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, P.C.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Pomerantz v. Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, P.C.

132 A.D.3d 832, 17 N.Y.S.3d 882

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

DecidedOctober 21, 2015

Docket2013-09312

StatusPublished

This text of 132 A.D.3d 832 (Pomerantz v. Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, P.C.) 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

Pomerantz v. Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, P.C., 132 A.D.3d 832, 17 N.Y.S.3d 882 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to enforce an attorney’s charging lien, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Adams, J.), entered July 12, 2013, as granted the separate cross motions of the defendant Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, P.C., the defendant Herman, Katz, Cangemi & Clyne, LLP, and the defendants City of Glen Cove and Glen Cove City Schools for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them, and, upon searching the record, awarded summary judgment to the defendant GCP, LLC, dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs payable to the defendants appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

In support of their separate cross motions for summary judgment, the defendants Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, PC., Herman, Katz, Cangemi & Clyne, LLP, City of Glen Cove, and Glen Cove City Schools adduced evidence that the plaintiff does not have a valid enforceable charging lien on the judgment filed in an underlying action entitled Spectrum Org., LLC v Board of Assessor of City of Glen Cove, under index No. 404555/06 (see Judiciary Law § 475; Banque Indosuez v Sopwith Holdings Corp., 98 NY2d 34, 44 [2002]; LMWT Realty Corp. v Davis Agency, 85 NY2d 462 [1995]; Robinson v Rogers, 237 NY 467, 473 [1924]). In opposition to the defendants’ prima facie showings of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the separate cross motions of the defendant Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, PC., the defendant Herman, Katz, Cangemi & Clyne, LLP, and the defendants City of Glen Cove and Glen Cove City Schools for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them, and, upon searching the record, awarded summary judgment to GCP, LLC, dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Dillon, J.P., Miller, Maltese and LaSalle, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to enforce an attorney’s charging lien, the plaintiff appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Adams, J.), entered July 12, 2013, as granted the separate cross motions of the defendant Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, P.C., the defendant Herman, Katz, Cangemi & Clyne, LLP, and the defendants City of Glen Cove and Glen Cove City Schools for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them, and, upon searching the record, awarded summary judgment to the defendant GCP, LLC, dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs payable to the defendants appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

In support of their separate cross motions for summary judgment, the defendants Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, PC., Herman, Katz, Cangemi & Clyne, LLP, City of Glen Cove, and Glen Cove City Schools adduced evidence that the plaintiff does not have a valid enforceable charging lien on the judgment filed in an underlying action entitled Spectrum Org., LLC v Board of Assessor of City of Glen Cove, under index No. 404555/06 (see Judiciary Law § 475; Banque Indosuez v Sopwith Holdings Corp., 98 NY2d 34, 44 [2002]; LMWT Realty Corp. v Davis Agency, 85 NY2d 462 [1995]; Robinson v Rogers, 237 NY 467, 473 [1924]). In opposition to the defendants’ prima facie showings of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact (see Alvarez v Prospect Hosp., 68 NY2d 320, 324 [1986]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the separate cross motions of the defendant Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, PC., the defendant Herman, Katz, Cangemi & Clyne, LLP, and the defendants City of Glen Cove and Glen Cove City Schools for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them, and, upon searching the record, awarded summary judgment to GCP, LLC, dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Dillon, J.P., Miller, Maltese and LaSalle, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 A.D.3d 832, 17 N.Y.S.3d 882, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pomerantz-v-meyer-suozzi-english-klein-pc-nyappdiv-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack