34 Cited authorities

Lawrence v. Miller
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 9434 (N.Y. 2008) Cited 403 times
Affirming denial of motion to dismiss in a legal malpractice case because the parties had not presented evidence to show whether the retainer agreement was unconscionable
Moran v. Erk
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 9255 (N.Y. 2008) Cited 128 times 1 Legal Analyses
Raising the prospect that New York law will not impose limitations on a party's discretion that are not created by the language of the contract
King v. Fox
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 4746 (N.Y. 2006) Cited 135 times
Finding that even a fee agreement otherwise prohibited as unconscionable may be enforced if the parties entered into it knowingly and intentionally
Riley v. St. Louis County
525 U.S. 1178 (1999) Cited 51 times
No. 98-1020. March 1, 1999, October TERM, 1998. C.A. 8th Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 153 F. 3d 627.
Chan v. Lund
188 Cal.App.4th 1159 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010) Cited 51 times
Holding that to undo a contract on the basis of duress, one must show "the doing of a wrongful act which is sufficiently coercive to cause a reasonably prudent person faced with no reasonable alternative to succumb to the perpetrator's pressure."
Mar Oil, S.A. v. Morrissey
982 F.2d 830 (2d Cir. 1993) Cited 67 times
Vacating district court's unquestioning acceptance of a lawyer's hours unsupported by contemporaneous records
Spiegel v. Goldfarb
66 A.D.3d 873 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009) Cited 37 times
No. 2008-06771. October 20, 2009. In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for medical malpractice, the plaintiffs appeal from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Martin, J.), dated June 30, 2008, as denied that branch of their motion which was to set an attorney's fee pursuant to the medical malpractice fee schedule set forth in Judiciary Law § 474-a on the portion of settlement proceeds received from the defendant Enzo Clinical Labs, Inc., and the nonparty Shearer Essner
Stroud v. Tunzi
160 Cal.App.4th 377 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) Cited 39 times
In Stroud, however, the modification substantially increased the amount of fees to be paid to the attorneys. The court held that any material change to a contingency fee agreement requires compliance with Business and Professions Code section 6147.
Quinn v. Walsh
18 A.D.3d 638 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005) Cited 35 times
2004-05523. May 16, 2005. In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, Ronald M. Sickmen, the former attorney for the plaintiffs, appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Underwood, J.), dated May 7, 2004, which granted the motion of Mark A. Musachio, attorney of record for the plaintiffs, for an award of the entire attorney's fee following settlement of the underlying personal injury action. Before: Schmidt, J.P., Santucci, Spolzino and Lifson, JJ., concur. Ordered that
Gair v. Peck
6 N.Y.2d 97 (N.Y. 1959) Cited 148 times
In Gair v. Peck, 6 N.Y.2d 97, 188 N.Y.S.2d 491, 160 N.E.2d 43 (1959), the New York Court of Appeals considered a court rule adopted by an Appellate Division of the Supreme Court, which provided, with exceptions not material to our discussion, that contingent fees in personal injury or death cases in excess of one-third of the net recovery were unreasonable and unconscionable, unless authorized by a written order of the court.
Section 691.20 - Claims or actions for personal injury, property damage, wrongful death, loss of services resulting from personal injuries, due to negligence or any type of malpractice, and claims in connection with condemnation or change of grade proceedings
N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 691.20 Cited 110 times
(a) Statements as to retainers; blank retainers. (1) Every attorney who, in connection with any action or claim for damages for personal injury or for property damages, or for death or loss of services resulting from personal injuries, due to negligence or any type of malpractice or in connection with any claim in condemnation or change of grade proceedings, accepts a retainer or enters into an agreement, express or implied, for compensation for services rendered or to be rendered in such action

In the Matter of Sylvan Lawrence, Deceased.---------------Richard S. Lawrence, et al., Respondents,v.Graubard Miller, et al., Appellants,----------------Richard S. Lawrence, et al., Intervenors-Respondents.

34 Cited authorities

Affirming denial of motion to dismiss in a legal malpractice case because the parties had not presented evidence to show whether the retainer agreement was unconscionable

Raising the prospect that New York law will not impose limitations on a party's discretion that are not created by the language of the contract

Finding that even a fee agreement otherwise prohibited as unconscionable may be enforced if the parties entered into it knowingly and intentionally

Holding that to undo a contract on the basis of duress, one must show "the doing of a wrongful act which is sufficiently coercive to cause a reasonably prudent person faced with no reasonable alternative to succumb to the perpetrator's pressure."

Vacating district court's unquestioning acceptance of a lawyer's hours unsupported by contemporaneous records

In Stroud, however, the modification substantially increased the amount of fees to be paid to the attorneys. The court held that any material change to a contingency fee agreement requires compliance with Business and Professions Code section 6147.