Roslyn Union Free School District v. Barkan

85 A.D.3d 1148, 925 N.Y.S.2d 887
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Roslyn Union Free School District v. Barkan. Read the opinion of the Court — 71 A.D.3d 660

Opinion

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of fiduciary duty and negligence, the defendants William Costigan, Ronna Niederman, Eatricia Schissel, and Ellen Siegel appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Cozzens, Jr., J.), dated July 15, 2010, which denied their motion to disqualify the plaintiffs counsel.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the appellants’ motion to disqualify the plaintiff’s counsel (see Tekni-Plex, Inc. v Meyner & Landis, 89 NY2d 123, 131 [1996]; Solow v Grace & Co., 83 NY2d 303, 308 [1994]; Talvy v American Red Cross in Greater N.Y., 205 AD2d 143, 148-149 [1994], affd 87 NY2d 826 [1995]). Rivera, J.P., Florio, Austin and Cohen, JJ., concur.

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

Roslyn Union Free School District v. Barkan, 85 A.D.3d 1148, 925 N.Y.S.2d 887 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2011).

85 A.D.3d 1148 (Roslyn Union Free School District v. Barkan) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Solow v. W. R. Grace & Co.
632 N.E.2d 437 (New York Court of Appeals, 1994)
Tekni-Plex, Inc. v. Meyner & Landis
674 N.E.2d 663 (New York Court of Appeals, 1996)
Talvy v. American Red Cross in Greater New York
661 N.E.2d 159 (New York Court of Appeals, 1995)
Talvy v. American Red Cross in Greater New York
205 A.D.2d 143 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1994)