Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1966

Rao v. Noferi

Rao v. Noferi
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided March 24, 1966
50 Misc. 2d 60; 269 N.Y.S.2d 534; 1966 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 2058

Counsel

Martin Elliott Silfen for appellants. No appearance for respondents.

Rao v. Noferi

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

An attorney has the implied authority to incur and is entitled to be reimbursed for such reasonable expenditures as the diligent prosecution or defense of the lawsuit may require (Badger v. Celler, 41 App. Div. 599; Regis Radio Corp. v. American Employers Ins. Co., 30 Misc 2d 341; Matter of Lessig, 165 Misc. 706). However, such disbursements are not deemed to include expenditures which are a necessary part or adjunct of a properly equipped lawyer’s office (Matter of Lessig, supra.)

The order should be reversed, with $10 costs, motion for summary judgment granted and case remitted to the court below for an assessment of plaintiffs’ damages under CPLR 3212 (subd. [c]).

Tilzer, J. P., Hoestadter and Gold, JJ., concur.

Order reversed, etc.

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