Sterling v. Parker & Waichman

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sterling v. Parker & Waichman

253 A.D.2d 435, 675 N.Y.S.2d 898, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8796

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided August 3, 1998·Published

Opinion

In a proceeding for leave to discharge and substitute counsel, Parker & Waichman appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), entered August 25, 1997, which granted the petitioner’s application to be relieved of paying any fees to it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The record supports a finding that the appellant was not entitled to any compensation for its legal services because its discharge by the petitioner was for cause (see, Campagnola v Mulholland, Minion & Roe, 76 NY2d 38, 44; Squeri v Fournarakis, 170 AD2d 444). Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Santucci, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding for leave to discharge and substitute counsel, Parker & Waichman appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Held, J.), entered August 25, 1997, which granted the petitioner’s application to be relieved of paying any fees to it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The record supports a finding that the appellant was not entitled to any compensation for its legal services because its discharge by the petitioner was for cause (see, Campagnola v Mulholland, Minion & Roe, 76 NY2d 38, 44; Squeri v Fournarakis, 170 AD2d 444). Bracken, J. P., Copertino, Santucci, Florio and McGinity, JJ., concur.

Sterling v. Parker & Waichman, 253 A.D.2d 435, 675 N.Y.S.2d 898, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8796 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

253 A.D.2d 435 (Sterling v. Parker & Waichman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related