Tiringer v. Grafenecker

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York

Tiringer v. Grafenecker

38 Misc. 2d 29, 239 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1962 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2400

Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided October 26, 1962·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Order should he unanimously modified by providing that plaintiffs’ former attorney shall have a lien on the proceeds of the action realized by trial or settlement for disbursements in the sum of $98.15 advanced by him, and for the reasonable value of his services rendered prior to the order of disbarment; the value of such services shall be determined by the court at the trial of the issues or upon application after settlement of the action; and as so modified affirmed, without costs.

Absent any showing that plaintiffs’ former attorney was disbarred for conduct in connection with the case in question, he is entitled to a lien for his disbursements and for legal services rendered prior to his disbarment. (Flecha v. Goodman, 31 Misc 2d 444; Torgerson v. Harboro Associates, N. Y. L. J., June 12, 1962, p. 17, col. 2 [Supreme Ct., Kings County]; Alexander v. Kraemer, N. Y. L. J., March 27,1962, p. 14, col. 1 [Supreme Ct., Kings County].)

Concur — Hart, Di Giovanna and Brown, JJ.

Order modified, etc.

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

Per Curiam.

Order should he unanimously modified by providing that plaintiffs’ former attorney shall have a lien on the proceeds of the action realized by trial or settlement for disbursements in the sum of $98.15 advanced by him, and for the reasonable value of his services rendered prior to the order of disbarment; the value of such services shall be determined by the court at the trial of the issues or upon application after settlement of the action; and as so modified affirmed, without costs.

Absent any showing that plaintiffs’ former attorney was disbarred for conduct in connection with the case in question, he is entitled to a lien for his disbursements and for legal services rendered prior to his disbarment. (Flecha v. Goodman, 31 Misc 2d 444; Torgerson v. Harboro Associates, N. Y. L. J., June 12, 1962, p. 17, col. 2 [Supreme Ct., Kings County]; Alexander v. Kraemer, N. Y. L. J., March 27,1962, p. 14, col. 1 [Supreme Ct., Kings County].)

Concur — Hart, Di Giovanna and Brown, JJ.

Order modified, etc.

Tiringer v. Grafenecker, 38 Misc. 2d 29, 239 N.Y.S.2d 567, 1962 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2400 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

38 Misc. 2d 29 (Tiringer v. Grafenecker) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related