The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 001) 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 were read on this motion to/for PARTIAL SUMMARY JUDGMENT. DECISION + ORDER ON MOTION Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is granted. Background In this action to recover allegedly unpaid legal fees, plaintiff maintains that defendant owes $480,487.87 pursuant to a retainer agreement. It insists that it provided legal representation to defendant over the course of two years related to several matters. Plaintiff observes that its representation of defendant ended because defendant stopped paying his bills in late 2022. Plaintiff argues that it regularly provided defendant with invoices detailing the work performed and that defendant never objected to any specific bill or invoice. Plaintiff brings causes of action for breach of contract, account stated and quantum meruit. It points out that defendant made payments totaling $375,000 out of the more than $850,000 billed. Defendant contends that he told plaintiff to stop working on his behalf in January 2022 and that plaintiff performed work on matters unrelated to the subject matter of the retainer agreement. He also argues that plaintiff failed to include the itemized invoices in its moving papers and so plaintiff is not entitled to summary judgment on the account stated cause of action. Defendant also argues that there was always the possibility that an attorney for plaintiff would be a witness on behalf of defendant in one of the matters and so plaintiff cannot recover all that it seeks in the instant motion. Defendant maintains that it is too early, before there has been any discovery, to grant plaintiff summary judgment. In reply, plaintiff argues that defendant is attempting to manufacture an issue of fact where none exists and that documentary evidence shows that defendant was actively accepting plaintiff’s legal representation well after January 2022. Plaintiff asserts it attached each invoice to its moving papers and that each bill was mailed to defendant’s personal address. Account Stated A plaintiff makes “a prima facie showing of his entitlement to summary judgment on his account stated claim by providing documentary evidence of the invoices, and an affidavit stating that he sent the invoices on a [regular] basis to defendant, and that defendant received the invoices and failed to object to the invoices until this litigation” (Glassman v. Weinberg, 154 AD3d 407, 408, 62 NYS3d 54 [1st Dept 2017]). “In the context of an account stated pertaining to legal fees, a firm does not have to establish the reasonableness of its fee because the client’s act of holding the statement without objection will be construed as acquiescence as to its correctness” (Lapidus & Assoc., LLP v. Elizabeth St., Inc., 92 AD3d 405, 405-06, 937 NYS2d 227 [1st Dept 2012]). Here, there is no dispute that plaintiff and defendant entered into a retainer agreement which provided that plaintiff would represent defendant “in connection with U.S.A. v. Stephen Bannon, et. Al, 20 Cr. 4 l 2(A T) in the Southern District of New York, and such various and other matters and issues as may arise from time to time” (NYSCEF Doc. No. 15 at 1). The agreement also provided that “We will bill you on a monthly basis, which bill or statement is due and payable on presentation” (id. 6). And plaintiff met its prima facie burden on its account stated cause of action through the affidavit of its account receivables manager, Mr. Batista, who included the relevant invoices and asserted that the invoices were mailed by plaintiff’s accounting department to defendant on a regular basis (NYSCEF Doc. No. 10,
