Legal Opinion

Pomeranz v. Marcus

New York Supreme Court

Decided April 15, 1903PublishedCited by 3 opinions

Motion by the defendant’s attorney for leave to continue this action in order to enforce compensation for his services.

1Opinion of the Court

Gaynor, J.:

The defendant’s attorney asks leave to try the action for the purpose of getting judgment for costs against the plaintiff, in order to get paid in that way for his services. The papers reveal that this defendant also had an action pending against this plaintiff, and that the parties met and settled both actions by the payment of $200 by this plaintiff to this defendant, and the exchange of general releases.

The parties had the right to settle their cases; and it follows from the right of .the parties to settle an action that neither nor both of the attorneys can keep it going and…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Zimmer v. Metropolitan Street Railway Co.New York Supreme Court · 1900

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Paulson v. LysonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1903
  2. Gurley v. GruensteinNew York Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Mitchell v. MitchillAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1911

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

Powered by the Exa API