Legal Opinion
Denburg v. Flattau & Klimpl
New York Court of Appeals
Decided November 18, 1993PublishedCited by 105 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Chief Judge Kaye.
In this dispute between a law firm and a former partner, we agree with the Appellate Division that a provision in the partnership agreement requiring certain payments upon a *378partner’s withdrawal is unenforceable under Cohen v Lord, Day & Lord (75 NY2d 95). Nevertheless, we conclude that the Appellate Division erred in granting the former partner’s summary judgment motion because there are disputed factual issues surrounding a purported settlement agreement. Accordingly, we modify and remit to the trial court for further proceedings.
I
In 1983, the partners…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Hallock v. StateNew York Court of Appeals · 1984
- Jacob v. Norris, McLaughlin & MarcusSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1992
- McConnell v. Commonwealth Pictures Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1960
- Cohen v. LordNew York Court of Appeals · 1989
- Lloyd Capital Corp. v. Pat Henchar, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1992
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by105 opinions
- Rocanova v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United StatesNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- BDO Seidman v. HirshbergNew York Court of Appeals · 1999
- Solow v. W. R. Grace & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1994
- Matter of CoopermanNew York Court of Appeals · 1994
- People v. Applied Card Systems, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2008
100 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.