From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Caplan v. Lionel Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 30, 1965
23 A.D.2d 655 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)

Opinion

March 30, 1965


Order and judgment granting petitioners an allowance for legal services rendered, inclusive of disbursements, in the sum of $30,000 in connection with the prosecution of a special proceeding under section 619 Bus. Corp. of the Business Corporation Law affirmed, with $50 costs to petitioner-respondent-appellant against respondent Lionel Corporation. In affirming the court recognizes that the lawyers in rendering the service in the directors' election proceeding were concerned with the general activities of the corporation. Consequently, as noted by Special Term, the lawyers will be entitled to compensation, if successful, in the derivative stockholders' action they are now prosecuting, for efforts expended by them in the complex of litigation out of which the election proceeding emanated. It was well within the discretion of Special Term, which should not be lightly disturbed, to limit the present fee application in the light of the indivisibility of the services rendered.


I dissent and vote to modify the order appealed from so as to award the petitioners greater compensation. I believe the record amply supports a finding that, because of the efforts of the petitioners in this proceeding, the acquisition of the Premier properties at an unconscionable price was prevented, thereby resulting in a substantial saving to the Lionel Company. The award to the petitioners by Special Term could not have reflected compensation for the results so accomplished. In any event, if the record be insufficient to sustain such a finding, then there is sufficient in the record to warrant a further hearing to see whether, in fact, such results were obtained through the petitioners' efforts. I think, also, that the services of the petitioners in ultimately accomplishing the removal of the illegally elected board of directors, in the light of the time spent, warrants a greater amount than the $30,000 awarded. Nor do I perceive any justification for requiring that just compensation to the attorneys be contingent upon their success in the other independent stockholders' action now pending.


Summaries of

Matter of Caplan v. Lionel Corporation

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Mar 30, 1965
23 A.D.2d 655 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)
Case details for

Matter of Caplan v. Lionel Corporation

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of HYMAN CAPLAN, Petitioner, v. LIONEL CORPORATION…

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

Date published: Mar 30, 1965

Citations

23 A.D.2d 655 (N.Y. App. Div. 1965)