Legal Opinion

Forstman v. Arluck

New York Supreme Court

Decided January 9, 1991PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Daniel F. Luciano, J.

This motion by the defendants Richard Dranitzke and James J. Finnerty for "[a]n order assessing costs and/or sanctions against plaintiffs counsel, pursuant to Section 8303-a of the CPLR and Section 130.1 and 130.2 of the Uniform Rules for the New York State Trial Courts in the amount of $10,000” is granted to the extent that costs are awarded in the amount of $2,500 to defense counsel Furey, Furey, Lapping, Keller, O’Reilly & Watson, P. C., payable by Fuchsberg & Fuchsberg, Esqs., counsel for the plaintiff John H. Forstman. Pursuant to section 130-1.2…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Meiselman v. Crown Heights Hospital, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1941
  2. McDermott v. Manhattan Eye, Ear & Throat HospitalNew York Court of Appeals · 1964
  3. Paul v. BoschensteinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1984
  4. Frerks v. IandoliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Frink v. Gellert & Cutler, P. C.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  2. Matter of Farley (Doe)New York Supreme Court, Monroe County · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API