Dwyer v. Nicholson
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
2Per curiam
We conclude that the plaintiffs decedent, Peter Dwyer, and *72the defendant Michael Nicholson agreed that, upon the dissolution of their partnership, the only items that would be subject to distribution would be "net income, cash and other deposits in partnership bank accounts, and accounts receivable”. Because these parties agreed that the value of contingency fee cases and similar intangible firm assets would not be subject to distribution, we conclude that the Supreme Court erred in calculating the amount to be awarded to the plaintiff. For this reason, and also because…
3Cases cited14 opinions
- In re AhoNew York Court of Appeals · 1976
- Bader v. Cox, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1985
- Ellerby v. SpiezerAppellate Court of Illinois · 1985
- Sargent v. . McLeodNew York Court of Appeals · 1913
- Resnick v. KaplanCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1981
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by20 opinions
- Geron ex rel. Estate of Thelen LLP v. Seyfarth Shaw LLP (In re Thelen LLP)Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2013
- Legal Aid Society v. City of New YorkDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2000
- Geron v. Seyfarth Shaw LLPNew York Court of Appeals · 2014
- Shandell v. KatzAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1995
- Mendoza v. Plaza Homes, LLCAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.