Legal Opinion

562 Eglinton, Inc. v. Merlo

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

Decided November 13, 2000PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Order unanimously affirmed'without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted plaintiffs’ cross motion to disqualify the law firm representing defendant Samuel Merlo from further representation of Merlo in this action (see, Tekni-Plex, Inc. v Meyner & Landis, 89 NY2d 123, 131, rearg denied 89 NY2d 917). The law firm previously represented plaintiffs in connection with a residential development project, and the issues involved therein are substantially related to the subject matter of this declaratory judgment action (see, Press v Lozier, Inc., 239 AD2d 879). Whether the law firm…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Tekni-Plex, Inc. v. Meyner & LandisNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
  2. Shellberry v. AlbrightAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1999
  3. Press v. Lozier, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1997
  4. Reid Petroleum Corp. v. Boller's Auto Sales & Service, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Borland v. Sampson Steel Fabricators, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
  2. Schertz v. JenkinsCivil Court of the City of New York · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API