Search for: "Pellegrino v Oppenheimer & Co., Inc."
Results 1 - 6
of 6
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
12 Aug 2022, 3:19 am
Nor is it dispositive that plaintiffs and the Williams Defendants did not have a retainer agreement with respect to the engagement, given Stone’s explanation of the agreement he had with the Williams Defendants, the advice they gave him, the acts he undertook as part of the Williams Defendants’ engagement, and his reliance on their advice (see Pellegrino v Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., 49 AD3d 94, 99 [1st Dept 2008]). [read post]
3 Jan 2018, 4:33 am
The record clearly establishes an attorney-client relationship, as defendant entered into two stipulations extending Billiard’s time to answer in an underlying personal injury action, which were filed in court, and represented itself as Billiard’s attorney (see Cooke v Laidlaw Adams & Peck, 126 AD2d 453, 455 [1st Dept 1987]; compare Pellegrino v Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., 49 AD3d 94, 99 [1st Dept 2008]). [read post]
13 May 2022, 4:53 am
Inc. [read post]
19 Apr 2018, 3:59 am
Contrary to purported ongoing representation by decedent’s family and advisors, the record evidence demonstrates the lack of a mutual understanding that defendant would continue to represent the estate in the Devine action, even if there was a continuation of a general professional relationship (see Pellegrino v Oppenheimer & Co., Inc. [read post]
23 Jan 2008, 3:45 am
Oppenheim & Co., 554 N.Y.S.2d 487 (N.Y. [read post]
16 Sep 2022, 5:14 am
Plaintiff’s presumption that there would be a continuation of the retainer agreement she signed with J&S when Schlesinger moved to MLF is insufficient to raise an issue of fact (See Davis v Cohen & Gresser, LLP, 160 AD3d 484,486 [1 st Dept 2018] citing Pellegrino v Oppenheimer & Co., Inc., 49 AD3d 94, 99 [1st Dept 2008] [“a party cannot create the relationship based on his or her own beliefs or actions”]; Jane St. [read post]
