General

E.C. Robinson, III, Appellant, v. Friedman Management Corp. et al., Defendants. Slavin & Slavin, Esqs., Nonparty Respondent

49 A.D.3d 436854 N.Y.S.2d 68·New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division·2008·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

E.C. Robinson, III, Appellant, v Friedman Management Corp. et al., Defendants. Slavin & Slavin, Esqs., Nonparty Respondent. [854 NYS2d 68] [MAJORITY] The court properly concluded that plaintiffs attorney was entitled to a charging lien, inasmuch as the termination of the representation did not result from attorney misconduct, discharge for cause, or unjustified abandonment by the attorney (see Klein v Eubank, 87 NY2d 459, 464 [1996]). Contrary to plaintiffs contention, there was no need for an evidentiary hearing on the issue of whether counsel’s withdrawal was justifiable, where there is adequate evidence showing a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship (see Klagsbrun v Klagsbrun, 192 AD2d 306 [1993], lv dismissed 82 NY2d 846 [1993]). Concur—Tom, J.P., Friedman, Nardelli, Catterson and Moskowitz, JJ.