Legal Opinion

Carey & Associates v. Ernst

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

Decided October 18, 2005PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*339Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leland DeGrasse, J.), entered on or about March 26, 2004, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendants’ cross , motion to the extent of dismissing the fourth cause of action against defendant Rudi Ernst, Jr., unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the cross motion denied, the fourth cause of action reinstated and the matter remanded for further proceedings.

In December 1997, plaintiff law firm was retained by defendants Rudolf and Angelika Ernst (the Ernsts) to represent Rudolf in an extradition proceeding…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Anostario v. VicinanzoNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  2. Martin Roofing, Inc. v. GoldsteinNew York Court of Appeals · 1983
  3. Spodek v. RiskinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1989
  4. Concordia General Contracting v. PeltzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
  5. Spirt v. SpirtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Carey & Associates v. ErnstAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  2. Williams v. KublickAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2007

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

Powered by the Exa API