STAMM LAW FIRM AND GREGORY STAMM ESQ PLAINTIFFS RESPONDENTS v. ROSEMARY LIGOTTI DEFENDANT APPELLANT (2016)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

STAMM LAW FIRM AND GREGORY STAMM, ESQ., PLAINTIFFS–RESPONDENTS, v. ROSEMARY LIGOTTI, DEFENDANT–APPELLANT.

CA 16–00380

Decided: December 23, 2016

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CENTRA, LINDLEY, NEMOYER, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.

LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH G. MAKOWSKI, LLC, BUFFALO (JOSEPH G. MAKOWSKI OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT–APPELLANT. LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS C. PARES, BUFFALO, MAGAVERN MAGAVERN GRIMM LLP (EDWARD J. MARKARIAN OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFFS–RESPONDENTS.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from an order that, inter alia, denied that part of her motion pursuant to CPLR 3211 to dismiss the complaint. We conclude that Supreme Court properly denied that part of the motion. Contrary to defendant's contention, an attorney's failure to comply with the rules for retainer agreements set forth in 22 NYCRR 1215.1 does not preclude that attorney from recovering under the terms of a “ ‘fair, understood, and agreed upon’ “ fee arrangement (Ferst v. Abraham, 140 AD3d 581, 582; see Frechtman v. Gutterman, 140 AD3d 538, 538; Chase v. Bowen, 49 AD3d 1350, 1350–1351).

Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court

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Out of date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!

Welcome to FindLaw's Cases & Codes

A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.

Go To Learn About The Law