ROBINSON III v. Slavin & Slavin, Esqs., Nonparty Respondent. (2008)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Michael D. Stallman, J.), entered June 15, 2007, which, insofar as appealed from as limited by the briefs, upon granting the motion of plaintiff's attorney to be relieved as counsel, determined that counsel is entitled to a charging lien, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

 The court properly concluded that plaintiff's attorney was entitled to a charging lien, inasmuch as the termination of the representation did not result from attorney misconduct, discharge for cause, or unjustified abandonment by the attorney (see Klein v. Eubank, 87 N.Y.2d 459, 464, 640 N.Y.S.2d 443, 663 N.E.2d 599 [1996] ).   Contrary to plaintiff's contention, there was no need for an evidentiary hearing on the issue of whether counsel's withdrawal was justifiable, where there is adequate evidence showing a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship (see Klagsbrun v. Klagsbrun, 192 A.D.2d 306, 595 N.Y.S.2d 456 [1993], lv. dismissed 82 N.Y.2d 846, 606 N.Y.S.2d 597, 627 N.E.2d 519 [1993] ).