Cohen & Malad, LLP v. Daly
Indiana Court of Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BAKER, Judge.
In this case, faced with a situation in which appellant-defendant John Daly took twenty-four cases with him when he left the firm of appellant-plaintiff Cohen & Ma-lad LLP (C & M), we are asked to examine the correct apportionment of attorney fees. C & M appeals the trial court’s determination that it was not due quantum meruit compensation from appellee-defen-dants John Daly Jr., Golitko & Daly, P.C. (Golitko & Daly), and Golitko Legal Group P.C. More particularly, C & M argues that the trial court failed to apply the quantum meruit recovery rule established by Galan-is…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Paternity of K.I. ex rel. J.I. v. J.H.Indiana Supreme Court · 2009
- Woodruff v. Indiana Family & Social Services AdministrationIndiana Supreme Court · 2012
- Galanis v. Lyons & TruittIndiana Supreme Court · 1999
- Clark v. CroweIndiana Court of Appeals · 2002
- Kelly v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1993
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Cohen & Malad, LLP v. John P. Daly, Jr., Golitko & Daly, P.C., and Golitko Legal Group, P.C.Indiana Supreme Court · 2015