41 Cited authorities

Williams v. N.Y. City Hous. Auth
61 A.D.3d 62 (N.Y. App. Div. 2009) Cited 1,021 times 17 Legal Analyses
Holding that the continuing violation doctrine did not apply to plaintiff's NYCHRL claim because plaintiff failed to allege any "actionable conduct during the limitations period"
Venegas v. Mitchell
495 U.S. 82 (1990) Cited 331 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that it is the party’s right to waive, settle, or negotiate the party’s entitlement to receive attorney’s fees
Lawrence v. Miller
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 9434 (N.Y. 2008) Cited 402 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
Pickett v. Sheridan Health Care Ctr.
664 F.3d 632 (7th Cir. 2011) Cited 360 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the attorney's substantial evidence pointed to a rate lower than the one requested, but observing that if defendant had submitted no evidence on this issue, then the district court would be required to award fees at plaintiff's proposed rate
Albunio v. City of New York
2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 2480 (N.Y. 2011) Cited 351 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that courts must construe provisions of the NYCHRL "broadly in favor of discrimination plaintiffs, to the extent that such a construction is reasonably possible"
Daly v. Hill
790 F.2d 1071 (4th Cir. 1986) Cited 365 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that " proper computation of the lodestar fee will, in the great majority of cases, constitute the 'reasonable fee' contemplated by [Section] 1988."
Montgomery v. Noga
168 F.3d 1282 (11th Cir. 1999) Cited 213 times
Holding that the prevailing party is "the party succeeding on a significant litigated issue that achieves some of the benefits sought by that party in initiating the suit."
Jacobson v. Sassower
66 N.Y.2d 991 (N.Y. 1985) Cited 247 times
Affirming Jacobson v. Sassower, supra
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
New York Public Research v. Carey
42 N.Y.2d 527 (N.Y. 1977) Cited 282 times
In NYPIRG, the Court declined to determine the constitutionality of a voting proposition given the possibility that voters would not approve it, observing that a declaratory judgment "would be merely of abstract interest and moot."
Section 1988 - Proceedings in vindication of civil rights
42 U.S.C. § 1988 Cited 21,758 times 43 Legal Analyses
Finding that 28 U.S.C. § 1920 defines the term "costs" as used in Rule 54(d) and enumerates the expenses that a federal court may tax as a cost under the discretionary authority granted in Rule 54(d)

Captain Lori Albunio et al., Appellants,v.The City of New York, et al., Defendants, Mary D. Dorman, Nonparty-Respondent.

41 Cited authorities

Holding that the continuing violation doctrine did not apply to plaintiff's NYCHRL claim because plaintiff failed to allege any "actionable conduct during the limitations period"

Holding that it is the party’s right to waive, settle, or negotiate the party’s entitlement to receive attorney’s fees

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

Holding that the attorney's substantial evidence pointed to a rate lower than the one requested, but observing that if defendant had submitted no evidence on this issue, then the district court would be required to award fees at plaintiff's proposed rate

Holding that courts must construe provisions of the NYCHRL "broadly in favor of discrimination plaintiffs, to the extent that such a construction is reasonably possible"

Holding that " proper computation of the lodestar fee will, in the great majority of cases, constitute the 'reasonable fee' contemplated by [Section] 1988."

Holding that the prevailing party is "the party succeeding on a significant litigated issue that achieves some of the benefits sought by that party in initiating the suit."

Affirming Jacobson v. Sassower, supra

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

In NYPIRG, the Court declined to determine the constitutionality of a voting proposition given the possibility that voters would not approve it, observing that a declaratory judgment "would be merely of abstract interest and moot."

Finding that 28 U.S.C. § 1920 defines the term "costs" as used in Rule 54(d) and enumerates the expenses that a federal court may tax as a cost under the discretionary authority granted in Rule 54(d)