AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Advocates
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Advocates
Judges

MOSHE KATLOWITZ, APPELLANT, v. HINDY HALBERSTAM, ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

ORDERED that the order is modified, on the law, by deleting the provision thereof determining that the plaintiff is not entitled to recover any additional legal fees; as so modified, the order is affirmed, with costs to the defendants, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Kings County, for further proceedings in accordance herewith.

Although there is no per se rule barring the use of a confession of judgment with respect to legal fees, an attorney obtaining one must make sure, among other things, that the client understands that the amount is to be agreed upon or fixed by the court. Moreover, the use of a confession of judgment for unearned and prospective fees is impermissible (see, Matter of Kauffman, 99 A.D.2d 640; N Y State Bar Assn. Comm. on Professional Ethics, Opn No. 474). The plaintiff's client, the defendant Sinai Halberstam (hereinafter Sinai), and his client's wife, the defendant Hindy Halberstam (hereinafter Hindy), signed blank affidavits of confession of judgment, which the plaintiff admitted to filling in later to reflect, inter alia, legal fees that had not been earned at the time of the signing. Therefore, the Supreme Court properly vacated the two judgments by confession (see, Matter of Kauffman, supra).

We disagree, however, with the Supreme Court's conclusion that the plaintiff is not entitled to recover any additional legal fees above the $50,000 already paid to him. The record demonstrates that Sinai and Hindy signed the affidavits of confession of judgment for additional legal fees after the payment of $50,000 to the plaintiff. Furthermore, Sinai signed a letter stating that he owed the plaintiff approximately $30,000 in additional legal fees and directing that proceeds from a prospective sale of real property be paid to the plaintiff, and issued a check to the plaintiff in the amount of $70,000. Accordingly, as the parties contemplated that additional legal fees would be paid to the plaintiff for services rendered, this matter is remitted to the Supreme Court to determine the total amount of reasonable legal fees to which the plaintiff is entitled.

KRAUSMAN, J.P., H. MILLER, SCHMIDT and CRANE, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

KATLOWITZ v. HALBERSTAM
(Jun 4, 2001)