Legal Opinion

Istim, Inc. v. Chemical Bank

New York Court of Appeals

Decided October 17, 1991PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

Hancock, Jr., J.

Both parties to this appeal claim a right to a settlement fund from a terminated Illinois Federal court action in which neither party was a litigant. Petitioner Istim, Inc.’s claim is based on a default judgment, and respondent law firm Willkie Farr & Gallagher’s claim is based on a disputed statutory attorney’s charging lien. The issue before us is a choice-of-law question: whether the Illinois or New York attorney’s lien statute applies. If Illinois law applies, Willkie’s asserted lien did not attach because it failed to provide the notice apparently…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Babcock v. JacksonNew York Court of Appeals · 1963
  2. Auten v. AutenNew York Court of Appeals · 1954
  3. James v. PowellNew York Court of Appeals · 1967
  4. Miller v. MillerNew York Court of Appeals · 1968
  5. Robinson v. . RogersNew York Court of Appeals · 1924

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

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. Matter of Allstate Ins. Co.(stolarz-Njm)New York Court of Appeals · 1993
  2. In re the Arbitration between Allstate Insurance & StolarzNew York Court of Appeals · 1993
  3. Lazard Freres & Co., Plaintiff-Counter-Defendant-Appellee v. Protective Life Insurance Company, Defendant-Counter-Claimant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1997
  4. Brink's Limited v. South African AirwaysCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
  5. Finance One Public Company Limited v. Lehman Brothers Special Financing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2005

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

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

Powered by the Exa API