Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011

Pryor & Mandelup, LLP v. Sabbeth

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided March 1, 2011

82 A.D.3d 731; 918 N.Y.2d 165

Cases that cite this one

18 later published cases cite this decision.

Bank of N.Y. Mellon v. Gordon (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2019)
Joseph W. Ryan, Jr., P.C. v. Faibish (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2016)
Quino v. Heburechnaya I.S., Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2024)
Elwood Intl., Inc. v. Universal Coffee Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2023)
Finger & Finger, A Professional Corp. v. Buckingham Owners, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2018)
Bashian & Farber, LLP v. Syms (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
MEYER, M.D., MICHAEL v. UNIVERSITY NEUROLOGY (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
Mauro Lilling Naparty, LLP v. Huang (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
State of New York v. Swezey (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2014)
Law Offices of David J. Sutton, P.C. v. NYC Hallways & Lobbies, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Law Offices of David J. Sutton, P.C. v. NYC Hallways & Lobbies, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Wilson v. City of Mount Vernon (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Wilson v. City of Mount Vernon (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2013)
Brown v. Kass (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Sabre International Security, Ltd. v. Vulcan Capital Management, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Potruch & Daab, LLC v. Abraham (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Potruch & Daab, LLC v. Abraham (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2012)
Law Offices of Kleinbaum v. Shurkin (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2011)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

*732The appeal from the intermediate order must be dismissed because the right of direct appeal therefrom terminated with the entry of judgment in the action (see Matter of Aho, 39 NY2d 241 [1976]). The issues raised on the appeal from the order are brought up for review and have been considered on the appeal from the judgment (see CPLR 5501 [a] [1]).

The plaintiff, a law firm, established its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on its first cause of action to recover damages for breach of an oral contract, by submitting the affirmation of Robert L. Pryor, a partner of the plaintiff, stating that the defendant Stephen J. Sabbeth promised to pay the plaintiff $160,000 if he recovered on a certain fire insurance policy. In opposition to the plaintiffs prima facie showing, the defendants raised a triable issue of fact by submitting Sabbeth’s affidavit, wherein he denied making that promise. “On a motion for summary judgment the court must not weigh the credibility of witnesses unless it clearly appears that the issues are feigned and not genuine” and “[a]ny conflict in the testimony or evidence presented merely raise[s] an issue of fact” (6243 Jericho Realty Corp. v AutoZone, Inc., 27 AD3d 447, 449 [2006]; see also Chase v Skoy, 146 AD2d 563 [1989]). Therefore, the Supreme Court should have denied that branch of the plaintiffs motion which was for summary judgment on its first cause of action to recover damages for breach of an oral contract.

The plaintiff demonstrated its prima facie entitlement to judgment as a matter of law on its fourth cause of action based upon an account stated for legal fees by submitting evidence “that the defendants received and retained, without objection, the invoices that the plaintiff sent them seeking payment for professional services rendered” (Thaler & Gertler v Weitzman, 282 AD2d 522, 523 [2001]; see Ziskin Law Firm, LLP v BiCounty Elec. Corp., 43 AD3d 1158, 1159 [2007]; Sullivan v REJ Corp., 255 AD2d 308 [1998]; Werner v Nelkin, 206 AD2d 422, *733422-423 [1994]). In opposition, the defendants failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Therefore, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the plaintiff’s motion which was for summary judgment on its fourth cause of action based upon an account stated for legal fees. Covello, J.E, Eng, Chambers and Hall, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.