Legal Opinion
Cardali v. Slater
New York Supreme Court
Decided May 18, 2017PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Arlene P. Bluth, J.
Motion sequence Nos. 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 are consolidated for disposition. Because motion sequence No. 13 consists of dis-positive motions, that motion and its cross motion for summary judgment will be addressed first.
Background
Plaintiff Robert Cardali and defendant Richard Slater are both experienced attorneys who specialize in personal injury cases. Slater worked for Cardali’s various firms for over 20 years. On August 19, 2010, the parties had an argument and Cardali fired Slater.
When personal injury lawyers work on a contingency fee basis, they do…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Zuckerman v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Winegrad v. New York University Medical CenterNew York Court of Appeals · 1985
- Rinaldi v. Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc.New York Court of Appeals · 1977
- Vega v. Restani Construction Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 2012
- Gross v. New York Times Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1993
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Gandhi v. NYS Unified Court SystemDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2021
- Gandhi v. NYS Unified Court SystemDistrict Court, N.D. New York · 2021
- Shahidullah v. ShankarDistrict Court, D. Maryland · 2022