Because of the sanctity of the attorney-client relationship and the trust and confidence it naturally engenders, it is closely scrutinized by the courts in order to insure that no unfair advantage is taken by one party over the other, commitments made are fulfilled, and a lawyer’s conduct and work is performed within the bounds of propriety. In recent months these concerns have been demonstrated by decisions addressed to retainer agreements, the rules regarding attorney misconduct, and disqualification of counsel. These decisions, while not emanating from the Surrogate’s Court, are instructive to practitioners in every field.
Retainer Agreements
Retainer agreements, and the entitlement of counsel to fees in the absence of a retainer, were the subject of an opinion by the Appellate Division, First Department in Nabi v. Sells. Before the court was an appeal from an Order of the Supreme Court, New York County (O. Peter Sherwood, J.), which granted the defendant-law firm’s motion to dismiss its former client’s claim that the firm forfeited its right to a legal fee pursuant to a contingency fee arrangement by reason of its noncompliance with the provisions of 22 NYCRR 1215.1.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
