Search for: "Egnotovich v Katten Muchin Zavis & Roseman LLP"
Results 1 - 6
of 6
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
21 Feb 2008, 3:36 am
Defendant Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP, sued here as Katten Muchin Zavis & Roseman LLP (Katten), acted as escrow agent for the escrow account. [read post]
4 Jan 2011, 2:06 am
Katten Muchin Zavis & Roseman LLP, 604101/06 , Decided January 23, 2008 ,Justice Bernard J. [read post]
5 Feb 2010, 4:18 am
Katten Muchin Zavis & Roseman LLP, 604101/06 , Decided January 23, 2008 ,Justice Bernard J. [read post]
21 Feb 2008, 12:19 am
Katten Muchin Zavis & Roseman LLP KINGS COUNTYContractsPlaintiff Could Not Recover for Breach of Contract; Recovery Under Quantum Meruit AppropriateRodriguez v. [read post]
22 Dec 2009, 3:26 am
The aspects of the contingency fee retainer agreement prepared by defendants and signed by plaintiff that allegedly render it noncompliant with 22 NYCRR 1215.1 do not bar defendants from recovering in quantum meruit (see Seth Rubenstein, P.C. v Ganea, 41 AD3d 54, 60-64 [2007]; see also Egnotovich v Katten Muchin Zavis & Roseman LLP, 55 AD3d 462, 464 [2008]; Nicoll & Davis LLP v Ainetchi, 52 AD3d 412… [read post]
29 Jul 2010, 3:45 am
""However, a law firm's "failure to comply with the rules on retainer agreements (22 NYCRR 1215.1) does not preclude it from suing to recover legal fees for the services it provided" (Miller v Nadler, 60 AD3d 499, 500 [Sup Ct New York County 2009], citing Egnotovich v Katten Muchin Zavis & Roseman LLP, 55 AD3d 462, 464 [1st Dept 2008]; Nicoll & Davis LLP v Ainetchi, 52 AD3d 412… [read post]
