Search for: "POTTS v. GRAHAM"
Results 1 - 8
of 8
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
30 Aug 2014, 10:42 pm
This remains true even in the event that the parties have consented to the requested fee akin to Matter of Stortecky v Mazzone and Matter of Phelan. [read post]
2 Sep 2014, 10:45 pm
This remains true even in the event that the parties have consented to the requested fee akin to Matter of Stortecky v Mazzone and Matter of Phelan. [read post]
31 Aug 2014, 10:46 pm
This remains true even in the event that the parties have consented to the requested fee akin to Matter of Stortecky v Mazzone and Matter of Phelan. [read post]
13 Sep 2014, 10:41 pm
This remains true even in the event that the parties have consented to the requested fee akin to Matter of Stortecky v Mazzone and Matter of Phelan. [read post]
1 Sep 2014, 10:52 pm
This remains true even in the event that the parties have consented to the requested fee akin to Matter of Stortecky v Mazzone and Matter of Phelan. [read post]
3 Sep 2014, 10:42 pm
This remains true even in the event that the parties have consented to the requested fee akin to Matter of Stortecky v Mazzone and Matter of Phelan. [read post]
6 Sep 2013, 7:30 pm
With regard to disbursements, the tradition in Surrogate's Court practice is that the attorney may not be reimbursed for expenses that the court normally considers to be part of overhead, such as photocopying, postage, telephone calls, and other items of the same matter as held in Matter of Graham. [read post]
