From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Melendez v. Barbulescu

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 3, 1996
228 A.D.2d 420 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

June 3, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Kings County (Huttner, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

We find no merit to the appellant's contention that the Supreme Court erred in apportioning the legal fees in this case without holding an evidentiary hearing. Both the appellant and the plaintiffs' current attorney submitted evidence in support of their respective contentions, thereby providing the Supreme Court with an ample basis to render a determination ( see, Rondinelli v Yabuki, 224 A.D.2d 404). Balletta, J.P., Rosenblatt, Thompson and Copertino, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Melendez v. Barbulescu

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jun 3, 1996
228 A.D.2d 420 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Melendez v. Barbulescu

Case Details

Full title:MARIO MELENDEZ and Another, Infants, by Their Mother and Natural Guardian…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Jun 3, 1996

Citations

228 A.D.2d 420 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
643 N.Y.S.2d 419

Citing Cases

Tverskaya v. Avis Corp.

There is no indication that the appellant requested such a hearing. Furthermore, it appears that the…

In the Matter of DeLorenzo v. Perlman

Under the circumstances of this case, the Supreme Court did not err in apportioning the attorney's fee…