From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Perez v. Perez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 2, 1989
154 A.D.2d 359 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)

Opinion

October 2, 1989

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Wood, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

In September 1984 the nonparty appellant, an attorney, was engaged by the defendant-respondent to represent him in the instant action for a divorce and ancillary relief. The appellant charged $175 an hour for his time and $25 an hour for his paralegal's time. In December 1986 the appellant was discharged by the defendant-respondent, not for cause. Between the time he was hired and the time he was discharged the appellant submitted 19 invoices to the defendant-respondent, charging a total of $65,356.94 for some 374 hours of his own time and 29 1/4 hours of his paralegal's time. The defendant-respondent had paid $37,195.07. When the defendant-respondent failed to execute a confession of judgment for the remaining amount of $28,161.87, the appellant asserted his common-law retaining lien on the file in his possession.

The Supreme Court properly rejected the appellant's claim that there was an account stated between him and the defendant-respondent (see, Rodkinson v Haecker, 248 N.Y. 480, 485). In the absence of an account stated the appellant was properly awarded the fair and reasonable value of his services under a quantum meruit theory (see, Matter of Montgomery, 272 N.Y. 323, 326; see also, Jacobson v Sassower, 66 N.Y.2d 991, 993; Demov, Morris, Levin Shein v Glantz, 53 N.Y.2d 553). Mollen, P.J., Thompson, Kunzeman and Spatt, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Perez v. Perez

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Oct 2, 1989
154 A.D.2d 359 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
Case details for

Perez v. Perez

Case Details

Full title:CATHERINE PEREZ, Plaintiff, v. LOUIS A. PEREZ, Respondent. LEONARD H…

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

Date published: Oct 2, 1989

Citations

154 A.D.2d 359 (N.Y. App. Div. 1989)
545 N.Y.S.2d 836

Citing Cases

R.A. Associates v. Lerner

trary position if it will result in prejudice to the adverse party (see, Van Valkenburgh v. Lutz, 304 N.Y.…

Greenfield, Eisenberg, Stein v. Tallering

In that vein, we fully understand that the determination under review may well have been grounded upon a…