Legal Opinion
Chemprene, Inc. v. X-Tyal International Corp.
New York Court of Appeals
Decided February 9, 1982PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be modified, with costs, by denying the defendant’s motion to compel plaintiff to select one attorney to represent him.
For the reasons stated by Justice Leon D. Lazer, in his partial dissent at the Appellate Division we agree that this was a matter within the discretion of the trial court and that the court did not abuse its discretion in this instance. We would note particularly that the nature of the claims involved in this case could suggest the possibility of diverse interests and a need for two attorneys. The…
2Cited by28 opinions
- Boswell v. Zephyr Lines, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1993
- People v. KnowlesNew York Court of Appeals · 1996
- Nossoughi v. Federated Department Stores, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1998
- Stinnett v. Sears Roebuck & Co.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
- Early v. County of NassauAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.