Murphy v. Huntington Hospital
Opinion of the Court
In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice
Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.
We find no basis to conclude that the Supreme Court improvidently exercised its discretion in determining the disbursement of counsel fees in this case (see, Clifford v Pierce, 214 AD2d 697, 698; Matter of Aronesty v Aronesty, 202 AD2d 240; Lefkowitz v Van Ess, 166 AD2d 556). O’Brien, J. P., Pizzuto, Friedmann and Krausman, JJ., concur.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.