Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Georgia Panagopoulos BLAU, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Shawn BLAU, Defendant-Appellant, Barry Blau, et al., Defendants.
Revised amended order, Supreme Court, New York County (John E.H. Stackhouse, J.), entered February 24, 2005, directing defendant to pay plaintiff's pendente lite attorneys' fees of $103,666.00 and $7,722.54 in costs and disbursements, and determining that plaintiff's counsel was entitled to a charging lien of $16,054.00 for attorneys' fees and $2,024.00 for costs and disbursements, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
Despite the husband's insistence that prior courts' orders concluding that plaintiff was not entitled to interim attorneys' fees constitute the law of the case, they were not binding on this Court when it rendered its decision in Blau v. Blau, 309 A.D.2d 672, 766 N.Y.S.2d 347 [2003], since it is not a co-ordinate, but a higher tribunal (Martin v. City of Cohoes, 37 N.Y.2d 162, 165, 371 N.Y.S.2d 687, 332 N.E.2d 867 [1975]; Rager v. McCloskey, 305 N.Y. 75, 78, 111 N.E.2d 214 [1953] ). Our prior decision did indicate that plaintiff would be entitled to interim attorneys' fees upon submission of evidence pertinent to the reasonable value of the services that were rendered and a decision showing how the motion court arrived at its award (id. at 672, 766 N.Y.S.2d 347; Domestic Relations Law § 237[a] ). We are now satisfied with counsel's submissions and the court's reasoning.
Insofar as defendant maintains that the court erred in altering its Amended Order following an ex parte communication with plaintiff's counsel, as reflected by the record, clearly defendant's attorney received plaintiff's counsel's letter, undermining his claim that it was ex parte. In any event, the changes plaintiff's counsel urged hardly required the formal motion practice defendant's attorney suggests since they were not substantive (see Matter of Guarino v. Allstate Ins. Co., 7 Misc.3d 1016(A), 2005 WL 991067, 2005 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 830, *17 [Sup. Ct., Kings County 2005] ).
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: October 27, 2005
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)