Legal Opinion

Cohen & Malad, LLP v. Daly

Indiana Court of Appeals

Decided August 27, 2014No. 29A02-1308-PL-741PublishedCited by 1 opinion

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

  1. Paternity of K.I. ex rel. J.I. v. J.H.Indiana Supreme Court · 2009
  2. Woodruff v. Indiana Family & Social Services AdministrationIndiana Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Galanis v. Lyons & TruittIndiana Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Clark v. CroweIndiana Court of Appeals · 2002
  5. Kelly v. SmithIndiana Supreme Court · 1993

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Cohen & Malad, LLP v. John P. Daly, Jr., Golitko & Daly, P.C., and Golitko Legal Group, P.C.Indiana Supreme Court · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API