Legal Opinion
Eighteen Associates, LLC v. Nanjim Leasing Corp.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided August 26, 2002PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*359An attorney who is discharged without cause possesses a common-law retaining lien on the client’s file in his or her possession, which secures the attorney’s right to the reasonable value of the services performed (see Lai Ling Cheng v Modansky Leasing Co., 73 NY2d 454, 458; see also Manes v Manes, 248 AD2d 515). “An attorney’s retaining lien must be respected” (Andreiev v Keller, 168 AD2d 528), and in the absence of exigent circumstances, the attorney should not be compelled to surrender the client’s file until an expedited hearing has been held to ascertain the amount of the attorney’s fee…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Lai Ling Cheng v. Modansky Leasing Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1989
- Fields v. CasseAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Andreiev v. KellerAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- Manes v. ManesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Markard v. MarkardAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Mosiello v. VelenzuelaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2011
- D'Ambrosio v. RacanelliAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015
- Lelekakis v. KamamisAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2004
- Rotker v. RotkerNew York Supreme Court · 2003
- Rodriguez v. Jacoby & Meyers, LLPAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2015