Opinion
April 14, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Loren N. Brown, J.).
A client may discharge an attorney at any time with or without cause. However, when a client discharges an attorney without cause, the attorney is entitled to recover compensation from the client measured by the fair and reasonable value of the services rendered whether that be more or less than the amount provided in the contract or retainer agreement (Lai Ling Cheng v Modansky Leasing Co., 73 N.Y.2d 454, 457-458). The conduct of plaintiff attorneys did not fall "below the ordinary and reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the profession" (Bernstein v Oppenheim Co., 160 A.D.2d 428, 430). Indeed, most of defendants' claims concern reasonable strategic choices regarding litigation. Such choices do not, as a matter of law, constitute malpractice (Rosner v Paley, 65 N.Y.2d 736, 738). Because defendants failed to establish malpractice, and thus their discharge of plaintiff was not for cause, the court correctly determined that plaintiff was entitled to the fair and reasonable value of its services. We accord deference to the award of the Trial Judge, "`who saw and heard the witnesses and who had ample time to examine the voluminous documents submitted'" (Ziprkowski v Goodman, 193 A.D.2d 389, quoting Major v Leary, 241 App. Div. 606, 606-607).
We have considered defendants' remaining claims and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Carro, J.P., Wallach, Rubin and Nardelli, JJ.