Opinion
13600-13600A Index No. 654346/15 Case No. 2020-02624
04-15-2021
[REDACTED A], Plaintiff–Appellant, v. [REDACTED B] PLLC, Defendant–Respondent.
[REDACTED A], appellant pro se. [REDACTED B] PLLC, New York ([REDACTED B] of counsel), for respondent.
[REDACTED A], appellant pro se.
[REDACTED B] PLLC, New York ([REDACTED B] of counsel), for respondent.
Renwick, J.P., Gische, Moulton, Mendez, JJ.
Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Jaffe, J.), entered on or about May 14, 2020, and on or about May 22, 2020, which, inter alia, granted defendant's motion for injunctive and related relief to the extent of enjoining plaintiff from conducting certain third-party discovery, and denied plaintiff's motion for discovery, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Contrary to plaintiff's contention, the retainer agreement in question was an advance payment retainer, and defendant was permitted to place the retainer funds in its operating account ( Ruberto v. DeFilippo, 29 Misc.3d 1236[A], 913 N.Y.S.2d 889, 2010 N.Y. Slip Op. 52170[U], *3–4 [Civ Ct, Richmond County 2010]).
In any event, the issue was moot, given that this Court had already granted plaintiff judgment on liability ( [REDACTED A] v. [REDACTED B] PLLC, 162 A.D.3d 585, 75 N.Y.S.3d 900 [1st Dept. 2018] ).
Contrary to plaintiff's assertion, the record shows that defendant objected to the disclosure of its financial records. Because neither these records nor the bank records that plaintiff seeks with regard to defendant's IOLA account are relevant to this damages phase of the action, the court correctly denied plaintiff's motions to compel or obtain third-party discovery.