Thursday, April 3, 2014

Whichever is Greater

The New York Court of Appeals has held favorably to an attorney in a case that presented this issue

This appeal concerns the appropriate treatment of statutory counsel fees awarded under the New York City Human Rights Law where the contingency fee agreement does not explicitly mention statutory fees. We hold that, absent a contract term expressly providing for a different distribution, an attorney is entitled to the greater of either the contingency fee or the statutory award.

The case involved former police officer two clients who retained counsel to sue New York but later became dissatisfied. The attorney sought declatatory relief when a dispute arose with the clients over her fees.

The court

...in light of their unequivocal terms, the Appellate [Fee] Agreements should be enforced as written. Because the statutory appellate fees exceeded the contracted-for minimum of $20,000 per appellant, per appeal, [attorney] Dorman is entitled to receive those court-ordered fees in their entirety. As for compensation owed to Dorman for her representation at trial, she is entitled to collect either one third of the jury award, or the statutory trial fees, whichever is greater.

(Mike Frisch)

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/legal_profession/2014/04/the-new-york-court-of-appeals-has-held-that.html

Billable Hours, Clients | Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef01a73da0ce8e970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Whichever is Greater:

Comments

Post a comment