Legal Opinion
Peterson v. Islamic Republic of Iran
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided May 18, 2017No. 16-2395-cvPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SUMMARY ORDER
David J. Cook and Cook Collection Attorneys, PLC (together, “Cook”) appeal from an order of the District Court (Forrest, J.) denying their motion to intervene pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 24(a). Cook seeks intervention to protect his asserted contractual interest and statutory charging lien on the proceeds *746from a judgment in favor of certain plaintiffs he used to represent as collection counsel in a related action. See N.Y. Judiciary Law § 475.1 Without deciding whether Cook’s alleged interests are valid and sufficient to support intervention of right, we agree…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- United States v. Pitney Bowes, Inc., Edo Corporation Plessey, Inc. Vernitron Corp., Baii Banking Corp., Movant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
- Itar-Tass Russian News Agency v. Russian Kurier, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1998
- Butler, Fitzgerald & Potter v. Sequa Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2001
- Campagnola v. MulhollandNew York Court of Appeals · 1990
- Floyd v. City of New YorkCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2014
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- New Falls Corporation v. Soni Holdings, LLCDistrict Court, E.D. New York · 2023
- Ortiz v. WagstaffDistrict Court, W.D. New York · 2023
- Peterson v. Islamic RepublicDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2018
- Peterson v. Islamic Republic of IranCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2018