1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 258 N.J.
  5. 258 N.J. Super. 474 (1992)
 

KATCHEN v. WOLFF & SAMSON

258 N.J. Super. 474 (1992)

610 A.2d 415

WILLIAM S. KATCHEN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. WOLFF & SAMSON, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION, JOEL A. WOLFF AND DAVID SAMSON, INDIVIDUALLY, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided July 20, 1992.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Terry E. Thornton argued the cause for the appellant (Lowenstein, Sandler, Kohl, Fisher & Boylan, attorneys; Zulima V. Farber and Terry E. Thornton, on the brief).

Justin P. Walder argued the cause for the respondents (Walder, Sondak, Berkeley & Brogan, attorneys).

Before Judges BILDER, STERN and KEEFE.

The opinion of the court was delivered by KEEFE, J.A.D.

The issue presented on appeal is whether a 1984 agreement executed by plaintiff, a New Jersey attorney, that provided for the forfeiture of plaintiff's equitable interest in the defendant law firm upon voluntary withdrawal from the firm violates RPC 5.6 and is unenforceable. The Law Division judge, relying substantially on our opinion in Jacob v. Norris, McLaughlin & Marcus,

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases