Matter of the Estate of Davis

Not overruled or negatively treated on appealinfoCoverage
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First DepartmentMar 18, 1999
687 N.Y.S.2d 70 (N.Y. App. Div. 1999)
687 N.Y.S.2d 70259 A.D.2d 366

March 18, 1999

Appeal from the Surrogate's Court, Bronx County (Lee Holzman, S.).

Petitioner's claim of unjust enrichment was properly rejected in view of his concession that his agreement to perform legal services for respondents was made exclusively with respondents' attorney of record, and that he never spoke with respondents about his fee and was never listed as attorney of record. It is not enough that respondents received a benefit from petitioner's services; if such were performed at the behest of someone other than respondents, petitioner must look to that person for recovery ( Kagan v. K-Tel Entertainment, 172 A.D.2d 375, 376).

Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Tom and Mazzarelli, JJ.