Matter of Reisfeld
New York Court of Appeals
• Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 4, 1919, which modified and affirmed as modified an order of Special Term in a proceeding to establish an attorney’s lien. The facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. There is no proof of a valid contract of retainer between the plaintiff and petitioners.
Read the full summary
• Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 4, 1919, which modified and affirmed as modified an order of Special Term in a proceeding to establish an attorney’s lien. The facts, so far as material, are stated in the opinion. There is no proof of a valid contract of retainer between the plaintiff and petitioners. (Matter of Snyder, 190 N. Y. 66.) Assuming that there was a valid contract of retainer the petitioners are nevertheless entitled only to the reasonable value of the services performed. (Tenny v. Berger, 93 N. Y.…
1Opinion of the CourtCardozo, J.
This is a proceeding by attorneys to establish and enforce a hen.
The infant child of Morris and Clara Nácht was run down and killed by an automobile truck in the city of New York. The father retained the petitioners to bring an action for damages. Their compensation was to be fifty per cent of any recovery by settlement or verdict. They caused the father to be appointed administrator, wrote the owner of the truck a letter of demand for payment, and thereafter served a summons. They had no opportunity to do anything more. The action was settled without their intervention, and $1,000 paid, and…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Martin v. . CampNew York Court of Appeals · 1916
- Taylor v. BemissSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Cooley v. Miller & LuxCalifornia Supreme Court · 1909
- In Re the Accounting of FitzsimonsNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
- Matter of HowellNew York Court of Appeals · 1915
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- In Re the Accounting of MengNew York Court of Appeals · 1919
- Thompson EstateSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1967
- In Re the Estate of GilmanNew York Court of Appeals · 1929
- In re the Estate of BloomingdaleNew York Surrogate's Court · 1939
- Neely v. Hollywood Marine, Inc.Supreme Court of Louisiana · 1988
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.