DE CASTRO v. TURNBULL

1106N, 114949/07.

66 A.D.3d 417 (2009)

885 N.Y.S.2d 599

2009 NY Slip Op 6787

STEVEN DE CASTRO, Respondent, v. HORACE TURNBULL, Appellant.

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

Decided October 1, 2009.


Assuming arguendo that defendant's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence was preserved by his unelaborated pro forma motion, the jury's findings that plaintiff attorney had not been discharged for cause and that he was entitled to his contingency fee pursuant to the retainer agreement (see generally Campagnola v Mulholland, Minion & Roe, 76 N.Y.2d 38, 44 [1990]), were based on legally sufficient evidence. Furthermore,...

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