TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Roulstone v. Oesterreicher

William B. Roulstone v. Jacques Oesterreicher

Roulstone v. Oesterreicher, 188 Misc. 741 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1946)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
New York Supreme Court · State Trial Courts
Decided
September 9, 1946
Judges
Pecora
Citations
188 Misc. 74166 N.Y.S.2d 2441946 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3022

Opinion of the Court — Pecora

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Pecora, J.

Plaintiff, an attorney, suing for fees and disbursements, makes this application for summary judgment. The relationship of attorney and client is admitted. Heretofore plaintiff in a special proceeding to have his lien fixed under section 475 of the Judiciary Law obtained an order in his favor fixing the amount of his lien in the precise amount sued for herein. In view of that determination, there remains no triable issue in this case. An attorney’s lien is measured by the value of his services, (Ward v. Craig, 87 N. Y. 550 .) It was held in Matter of Winkler ( 154 App. Div. 532 ) and Matter of Roberts Electric Supply Co., Inc. ( 131 Misc. 119 ) that once the value of attorney’s services is determined in a proceeding to fix his lien, it will be conclusive upon the parties in any other subsequent proceeding or action. (See, also, Levitan v. Sandbank, 291 N. Y. 352 .) It is no answer that the effect of such ruling would be to deprive defendant of a jury trial upon that question. Such a situation is present whenever a determination in an equity action precludes parties from litigating the same issues in a subsequent law action. (Young v. Farwell, 165 N. Y. 341 .) The order fixing the lien, although appealed from, must be given full effect upon this motion. There being no issue to be tried as to the value of the services, the motion for summary judgment is in all respects granted. Settle order.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1949: 11954: 11958: 11960: 11975: 11976: 12013: 119492026peak 1949 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Strobehn v. Mason397 S.W.3d 487 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013)
  2. Hoffpuir v. Hoxsey82 F. Supp. 14 (N.D. Tex. 1949)
  3. Regan v. Marco M. Frisone, Inc.54 A.D.2d 1125 (1976)
  4. Botein, Hays, Sklar & Herzberg v. Polymetrics International, Inc.81 Misc. 2d 398 (N.Y. City Civ. Ct. 1975)
  5. Fox v. Gina Construction Corp.22 Misc. 2d 177 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1960)
  6. Waxstein v. Brenhouse206 Misc. 707 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1954)

Most recent

  1. Strobehn v. Mason397 S.W.3d 487 (Mo. Ct. App. 2013)
  2. Regan v. Marco M. Frisone, Inc.54 A.D.2d 1125 (1976)
  3. Botein, Hays, Sklar & Herzberg v. Polymetrics International, Inc.81 Misc. 2d 398 (N.Y. City Civ. Ct. 1975)
  4. Fox v. Gina Construction Corp.22 Misc. 2d 177 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1960)
  5. Wolf v. Lesley11 Misc. 2d 902 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1958)
  6. Waxstein v. Brenhouse206 Misc. 707 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1954)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 5

DepthCaseCited by
Ward v. Craig, 87 N.Y. 550 (1882) 43
Leviten v. Sandbank, 52 N.E.2d 898 (N.Y. 1943) 36
Young v. Farwell, 59 N.E. 143 (N.Y. 1901) 8
In re Winkler, 154 A.D. 532 (1913) 5
H. C. Roberts Elec. Supply Co. v. Wilson, 131 Misc. 119 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1927) 3

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list