This article considers the implications of two recent decisions addressing different ways in which ethical rules and lawyers’ often pressing need to generate fees intersect. In both cases, the ethical rules prevail. In addition, the article discusses a case that explores the problems that can arise when lawyers rely too heavily on technology.
In Meyer, Suozzi, English & Klein, PC v. Vista Maro LLC, 11455/10, NYLJ, 1202479881557, at *1 (Sup. NA, Decided Jan. 12, 2011, reported in NYLJ, Feb. 2, 2011), Justice Ute Wolff Lally considered a summary judgment motion for legal fees based on an engagement letter which, on its face, established a fixed fee arrangement with the client.
This content has been archived.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]
