McNamara v. Guazzoni
Opinion of the Court
Plaintiffs’ claims, predicated upon transactions that were subject of litigation in a concluded nonpayment proceeding between the parties, are barred under the doctrine of res judicata (see O’Brien v City of Syracuse, 54 NY2d 353, 357 [1981]).
In light of the language of the leases and the other circumstances presented, defendant Guazzoni may be entitled to attorneys’ fees incurred in the defense of this action. Accordingly, the second counterclaim should be reinstated. In addition, inasmuch as the present record does not permit the conclusion that Guazzoni is, as a matter of law, precluded from recovering attorneys’ fees incurred in the underlying bankruptcy and federal court proceedings under the doctrine of res judicata, the first counterclaim should be reinstated. Concur—Buckley, EJ., Tom, Saxe, Friedman and Sweeny, JJ.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.