From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In the Matter of Maylissa N

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 8, 2004
5 A.D.3d 492 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)

Opinion

2003-01894.

Decided March 8, 2004.

In a proceeding pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law article 81, Steven T. Rondos appeals, as limited by his brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Thomas, J.), dated January 22, 2003, as disallowed an attorney's fee for services he provided to the co-guardians.

Raia Rondos, Brooklyn, N.Y. (Steven T. Rondos pro se of counsel), for nonparty-appellant.

Before: MYRIAM J. ALTMAN, J.P. GABRIEL M. KRAUSMAN, GLORIA GOLDSTEIN, WILLIAM F. MASTRO, JJ.


DECISION ORDER

ORDERED that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, without costs or disbursements, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Queens County, to determine the reasonable amount of an attorney's fee to be awarded to the appellant.

The Supreme Court erred in disallowing an attorney's fee to the appellant for, inter alia, the preparation and filing of the semi-annual account of the co-guardians, who are not attorneys or accountants ( see Matter of Helen C., 2 A.D.3d 729; Matter of Tijuana M., 303 A.D.2d 681; Matter of McCormick, 220 A.D.2d 506; cf. Matter of Erlandsen, 265 N.Y. 155). Accordingly, we remit the matter to the Supreme Court, Queens County, to determine the reasonable amount of an attorney's fee and to provide a clear and concise explanation of its reasons for the fee award ( see Matter of Mavis L., 285 A.D.2d 509; Ricciuti v. Lombardi, 256 A.D.2d 892; Matter of Stark, 174 A.D.2d 746).

ALTMAN, J.P., KRAUSMAN, GOLDSTEIN and MASTRO, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

In the Matter of Maylissa N

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Mar 8, 2004
5 A.D.3d 492 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
Case details for

In the Matter of Maylissa N

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF MAYLISSA N. (ANONYMOUS). and JUAN N. (ANONYMOUS), ET AL.…

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

Date published: Mar 8, 2004

Citations

5 A.D.3d 492 (N.Y. App. Div. 2004)
772 N.Y.S.2d 554

Citing Cases

In the Matter of Verna Eggleston

Accordingly, the Supreme Court should have conducted a hearing to determine what, if any, fees were due to…

In the Matter of Martha O.J

In the fourth matter, the court gave no explanation whatsoever for the attorney's fee award. Accordingly, we…