Legal Opinion · Dissent
Samuel v. Druckman & Sinel, LLP
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided April 8, 2008Published
1Dissent
Gonzalez and McGuire, JJ.,
dissent in a memorandum by Mc*325Guire, J., as follows: I agree with the majority that, for the reasons it states, Supreme Court erred in not deciding the motion and cross motion and that defendant Sinel’s law firm is entitled to a share of the $1.9 million legal fee awarded in the medical malpractice action. I also agree that the right of Sinel’s law firm to a share of the fee is not affected by the arrangement made between plaintiff Samuel’s law firm and the Pegalis law firm (see Borgia v City of New York, 259 AD2d 648 [1999]). I respectfully disagree with the…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Greenfield v. Philles Records, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 2002
- Breed v. Insurance Co. of North AmericaNew York Court of Appeals · 1978
- Vermont Teddy Bear Co. v. 538 Madison Realty Co.New York Court of Appeals · 2004
- Oppenheimer & Co. v. Oppenheim, Appel, Dixon & Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1995
- Baltimore & Ohio Southwestern Railway Co. v. VoigtSupreme Court of the United States · 1900
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.