General
Dunkin' Donuts, Incorporated, Respondent, v. HWT Associates, Inc., et al., Defendants. David B. Cohen, Non-party Appellant, and MAA Company, Nonparty Respondent
181 A.D.2d 711·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·1992·NY
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Dunkin’ Donuts, Incorporated, Respondent, v HWT Associates, Inc., et al., Defendants. David B. Cohen, Non-party Appellant, and MAA Company, Nonparty Respondent.
[MAJORITY]
In an action, inter alia, to recover on a promissory note, David Cohen, the former attorney for the defendant HWT Associates, Inc., appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Santucci, J.), dated June 11, 1990, which denied his motion pursuant to Judiciary Law § 475 to fix and enforce his attorney’s charging lien.
Ordered that the appeal is dismissed as academic, without costs or disbursements (see, Dunkin’ Donuts v HWT Assocs., 181 AD2d 713 [decided herewith]). Bracken, J. P., Harwood, Lawrence and O’Brien, JJ., concur.