From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Siroty v. Nelson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 18, 1994
200 A.D.2d 617 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)

Opinion

January 18, 1994

Appeal from the Surrogate's Court, Nassau County (Radigan, S.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Bank of New York contends that Cusack Stiles should be disqualified as counsel for United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company (hereinafter USFG) because Cusack Stiles was simultaneously representing the Bank of New York in Rosenberg v Bank of N.Y., pending in the Supreme Court, New York County, Index No. 2065791, while prosecuting a claim on behalf of USFG against the Bank of New York. We disagree.

Cusack Stiles has met its burden of demonstrating the absence of any conflict in loyalties or impediments to a vigorous representation of each client (see, Aerojet Props. v. State of New York, 138 A.D.2d 39). Ritter, J.P., Copertino, Pizzuto and Joy, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Siroty v. Nelson

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Jan 18, 1994
200 A.D.2d 617 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
Case details for

Siroty v. Nelson

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM C. SIROTY, Plaintiff, v. RICHARD F. NELSON et al., Defendants, and…

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

Date published: Jan 18, 1994

Citations

200 A.D.2d 617 (N.Y. App. Div. 1994)
606 N.Y.S.2d 728

Citing Cases

MATTER OF T'CHALLA D.

(See, e.g., Aerojet Props. v State, supra, 138 AD2d at 42 ["to disqualify Carter Conboy after extensive…

In the Matter of T'Challa

Contrary to the mother's contention, the simultaneous representation did not warrant the drastic remedy of…