1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.D.3d
  4. 191 A.D.3d
  5. 191 A.D.3d 499 (2021)
 

COSTA v. ARANDIA & ARANDIA

Index No. 158085/13. Appeal No. 12486. Case No. 2019-05006.

191 A.D.3d 499 (2021)

138 N.Y.S.3d 325

2021 NY Slip Op 00904

Luciana Costa, Appellant, v. Arandia & Arandia et al., Respondents.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department.

Decided February 11, 2021.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Sutton Sachs Meyer PLLC, New York ( Zachary G. Meyer of counsel), for appellant.

Arandia Law Firm, Kew Gardens (Alexander Arandia of counsel), for Arandia & Arandia, respondent and Alexander Arandia, respondent pro se.

Concur—Renwick, J.P., Kapnick, Kern, Moulton, JJ.

The motion court correctly rejected plaintiff's argument that the contingency fee agreement as a whole was unenforceable. Duly agreed contingent fee arrangements are generally valid (see Lawrence v Graubard Miller, 11 N.Y.3d 588, 596 n 4 [2008]). The contingency fee agreement here was not prohibited where the underlying dispute related only to plaintiff's alleged breach of the confidentiality provisions of a prior child support agreement...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases