The application of the doctrine of unfinished business to matters billed on an hourly basis1 continues to generate interesting and sometimes controversial case law. Two cases this year from California, the proverbial home of unfinished business law, further elucidate the scope of liability for unfinished business claims as well as the procedure used in unfinished business cases, which often arise in the bankruptcy context. While these recent decisions evidence California’s embrace of the application of unfinished business to law firms that bill on an hourly basis, in New York, we await the result of the certification of two conflicting decisions regarding unfinished business in the hourly billing context.
In this month’s column we discuss and analyze some of these recent decisions from California as they may, unfortunately, forecast the direction New York law will take in this area.
‘In re Howrey’
This content has been archived.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]
