1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.3d
  4. 27 A.D.3d
  5. 27 A.D.3d 236 (2006)
 

RUTA & SOULIOS, LLP v. LITMAN & LITMAN, P.C.

27 A.D.3d 236 (2006)

809 N.Y.S.2d 905

RUTA & SOULIOS, LLP, Respondent, v. LITMAN & LITMAN, P.C., et al., Appellants, et al., Defendant.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department.

March 7, 2006.

The motion court properly found plaintiff law firm entitled to a portion of the contingent fee recovered by defendants in the underlying action based upon its proportionate share of the work performed on the entire case (see Matter of Cohen v Grainger, Tesoriero & Bell, 81 N.Y.2d 655 [1993]; Lai Ling Cheng v Modansky Leasing Co., 73 N.Y.2d 454 [1989]). Contrary to appellants' argument...

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