OMANSKY v. BERMONT HOLDINGS LTD (2007)

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, New York.

Lawrence A. OMANSKY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. BERMONT HOLDINGS LTD and Tedd Blecher, Defendants-Appellants.

Decided: February 16, 2007

Present: McKEON, P.J., DAVIS, SCHOENFELD, JJ.

Tedd Blecher, New York City, for appellants. Lawrence A. Omansky, New York City, respondent pro se.

Order (Martin J. Shulman, J.), entered on or about March 1, 2006, reversed, with $10 costs, and cross motion denied.

Defendant Blecher's disqualification as counsel for defendant Bermont Holdings LTD (Bermont) under the advocate-witness rule (Code of Professional Responsibility DR 5-102[a] [22 NYCRR 1200.21[a]] ) was unwarranted. Inasmuch as Blecher is one of two shareholders in Bermont, a limited liability corporation, and his interests appear to be identical to those of Bermont, his disqualification would have little or no effect upon the nature and extent of his participation in the action (see S & S Hotel Ventures Ltd. Partnership v. 777 S.H. Corp., 69 N.Y.2d 437, 440, 515 N.Y.S.2d 735, 508 N.E.2d 647 [1987]; Stuart v. WMHT Educ. Telecom., Inc., 195 A.D.2d 918, 600 N.Y.S.2d 811 [1993] ).

This constitutes the decision and order of the court.

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network