Legal Opinion

Lillard v. Carter

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

Decided November 16, 1990No. Appeal No. 2PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

Order unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court, on reargument, properly adhered to its initial determination that the outgoing lawyer’s fee be determined at the conclusion of the case. That attorney unequivocally elected to have his contingent percentage fee determined upon settlement or at trial based on the proportionate share of the work performed on the whole case (see, Lai Ling Cheng v Modansky Leasing Co., 73 NY2d 454, 458).

Plaintiff also sought reargument or renewal upon the ground that the outgoing attorney was discharged for cause and was, therefore, not entitled to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Foley v. RocheAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1979
  2. Lai Ling Cheng v. Modansky Leasing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1989
  3. De Blasio v. Volkswagen of America, Inc.New York Supreme Court · 1984

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Mehta v. MehtaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993

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

Powered by the Exa API