Legal Opinion

Rubio v. Rubio

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

Decided February 21, 2012Published

1Opinion of the Court

Although, generally, an evidentiary hearing to determine the appropriate amount of an attorney’s fee should be conducted before the court grants an award of an attorney’s fee (see Matter of Hobenson v Tarnavsky, 76 AD3d 560, 561 [2010]; Kerrigan v Kerrigan, 71 AD3d 737, 738 [2010]; Sheikh v Basheer, *86034 AD3d 670 [2006]), the record demonstrates that the plaintiff waived his right to a hearing on this issue when he opposed that branch of the defendant’s motion which was for an award of an attorney’s fee (see Messinger v Messinger, 24 AD3d 631 [2005]; Bengard v Bengard, 5 AD3d 340, 341 [2004]; cf.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Janousek v. JanousekAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1985
  2. Messinger v. MessingerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005
  3. Bengard v. BengardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
  4. Kerrigan v. KerriganAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2010
  5. Sheikh v. BasheerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API