From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re of Gaffney v. Village of Mamaroneck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 19, 2005
21 A.D.3d 1032 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

2004-07177.

September 19, 2005.

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, inter alia, to review a determination of Kevin J. Plunkett, in his capacity as Village Attorney of the Village of Mamaroneck, dated September 30, 2003, denying the petitioners' application, among other things, to choose their own counsel at the expense of the Village of Mamaroneck in a pending federal litigation, the Village of Mamaroneck and Kevin J. Plunkett, in his capacity as Village Attorney of the Village of Mamaroneck, appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Lange, J.), dated July 7, 2004, as, fixed the compensation to be paid to the petitioners' counsel at the rate of $250 per hour.

Thacher Proffitt Wood, LLP, White Plains, N.Y. (Lino J. Sciarretta and Stefanie A. Bashar of counsel, and Kevin J. Plunkett pro se of counsel), for appellants.

Friedman, Harfenist, Langer Kraut, LLP, Purchase, N.Y. (Steven Jay Harfenist of counsel), for respondent Robert Holland, and Piscionere Nemarow, P.C., Rye, N.Y. (Anthony Piscionere of counsel), for respondent James Gaffney (one brief filed).

Before: Florio, J.P., H. Miller, Ritter and Rivera, JJ., concur.


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from with one bill of costs to the petitioners.

"In determining reasonable compensation for an attorney, a court will consider the following factors: `time and labor required, the difficulty of the questions involved, and the skill required to handle the problems presented; the lawyer's experience, ability and reputation; the amount involved and benefit resulting to the client from the services; the customary fee charged by the Bar for similar services; the contingency or certainty of compensation; the results obtained; and the responsibility involved'" ( Steiger v. Dweck, 305 AD2d 475, 476 , quoting Matter of Freeman, 34 NY2d 1, 9). The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in fixing the compensation to be paid to the petitioners' counsel at the rate of $250 per hour.

The appellants' remaining contention is without merit.


Summaries of

In re of Gaffney v. Village of Mamaroneck

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Sep 19, 2005
21 A.D.3d 1032 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

In re of Gaffney v. Village of Mamaroneck

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of JAMES GAFFNEY et al., Respondents, v. VILLAGE OF…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department

Date published: Sep 19, 2005

Citations

21 A.D.3d 1032 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
2005 N.Y. Slip Op. 6804
801 N.Y.S.2d 400

Citing Cases

Schwarz v. Schwarz

DISCUSSIONIn determining a reasonable attorney's fee, which represents the reasonable value of the legal…

RMP Capital Corp. v. Victory Jet, LLC

f attorneys' fees, whether pursuant to agreement or statute, must be reasonable and not excessive (see Miller…