Legal Opinion
Stewart v. New York City Transit Authority
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided December 30, 2014No. 13911/99PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Manzanet-DAJSTIELS, J.
The motion court erroneously determined that it had the inherent authority to reduce the fee plaintiff and his attorneys had agreed upon in connection with the successful defense of the verdict on appeal. Since the parties clearly excluded appellate work from the initial retainer, and executed a second retainer providing for a separate fee for appellate work, it cannot be said that the award of an additional 10% contingency fee ran afoul of precedent or section 603.7 (e) of the Rules of the Appellate Division, First Department (22 NYCRR), governing…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Albunio v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 2014
- Pjetri v. New York City Health & Hospitals Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991
- State v. Philip Morris Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Stewart v. New York City Transit AuthorityAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- Naiman v. New York University Hospitals CenterDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2005
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- In re the Estate of HaagNew York Surrogate's Court · 2016
- Stewart v. New York City Transit AuthorityNew York Supreme Court · 2015
- US Bank, N.A. v. DaskalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2018
- Wiggins v. Liakas Law, P.C.District Court, S.D. New York · 2023