Opinion
February 25, 1991
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Wager, J.).
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
We agree with the appellant's contention that had it completed its representation of its former client prior to being discharged without cause, it would be entitled to stand on its contract and recover the agreed value of its services (see, Finkelstein v Kins, 124 A.D.2d 92, 95, amended on other grounds 131 A.D.2d 351; Kronish, Lieb, Shainswit, Weiner Hellman v Howard Stores Corp., 44 A.D.2d 813; McAvoy v Schramme, 238 App. Div. 225, affd 263 N.Y. 548; see also, Martin v Camp, 219 N.Y. 170; Handleman v Olen, 11 A.D.2d 987, affd 11 N.Y.2d 896; see generally, 7 N.Y. Jur 2d, Attorneys at Law, § 148). However, in the instant case, the record establishes that the appellant was discharged prior to completing its representation of its former client, as two postjudgment but nonappellate matters were pending before the Supreme Court at the time of the appellant's discharge, which matters were completed by the wife's incoming attorneys. Accordingly, as the discharge occurred prior to completion of the outgoing law firm's representation of the wife, it is relegated to a recovery in quantum meruit (see, Jacobson v Sassower, 66 N.Y.2d 991; Demov, Morris, Levin Shein v Glantz, 53 N.Y.2d 553; Ventola v Ventola, 112 A.D.2d 291; see generally, 7 N.Y. Jur 2d, Attorneys at Law, § 148).
Furthermore, we are not persuaded by the appellant's alternate argument that the trial court's quantum meruit determination failed to take into account certain services rendered. On balance, considering the firm's generally successful representation of its former client in her divorce action, but also considering that certain superfluous services were rendered and incoming counsel was forced to resume prosecution of at least two matters begun by the outgoing firm, at additional cost and involving a duplication of efforts, we are satisfied that the $49,000 paid by the wife for the appellant's services constitutes a fair and reasonable quantum meruit recovery. Thompson, J.P., Brown, Sullivan and Miller, JJ., concur.