In re the Accounting of the United States Trust Co.
Cases that cite this one
15 later published cases cite this decision.
- Klein v. Acco Products, Inc. (District Court, E.D. New York 1935)
- Huffe v. Jarcho (N.Y. 1979)
- Elliott v. Hoberman (N.Y. 1971)
- In re Merkel, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1967)
- Glenmark, Inc. v. Carity (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1964)
- In re the Probate of the Will of Cohen (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1960)
- Kalish v. Kalish (New York Supreme Court 1957)
- Margold Residence Corp. v. Younger (N.Y. 1956)
- In re the Estate of McInnis (New York Surrogate's Court 1949)
- Griston v. Stousland (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 1946)
- In re the Accounting of Schaefer (N.Y. 1944)
- Fitzsimmons v. Long Island Lighting Co. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1937)
- Hausvater v. Wikler & Diamont, Inc. (City of New York Municipal Court 1935)
- Bernstein v. Suchoff (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 1934)
- Lewy v. Union Railway Co. (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York 1934)
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
This motion is made to substitute Armin H. Mittlemann as attorney for James Eckford DeKay upon this appeal in place and instead of Henry B. *409 Closson who has acted for DeKay as his attorney in the Surrogate’s Court, in the Appellate Division, and in this court on the application for leave to appeal.
The affidavits submitted in behalf of Mr. Closson show that DeKáy owes him for his services and that he has a lien both upon the papers and upon the cause of action or the proceeds thereof for his services.
A client has an absolute right to discharge his attorney with or without cause at any time so that we must grant the motion for substitution and make the order accordingly. This order of substitution, however, is without prejudice to or interference with any hen which Mr. Closson has both upon the papers of the chent in this or any other cause and upon the cause of action or the proceeds thereof.
The rights of attorney and chent are fully explained in the case of Robinson v. Rogers (237 N. Y. 467). (See, also, Matter of Badger, 9 Fed. Rep. [2d] 560; Matter of Krooks, 257 N. Y. 329.)
A motion to compel an attorney to turn over papers to a substituted attorney must be made in the court of original jurisdiction and not in this court. (People ex rel. Hoffman v. Board of Education, 141 N. Y. 86; Matter of Hollins, 197 N. Y. 361.)
Motion for substitution of attorney granted.
Motion to compel attorney to turn over papers denied, without costs.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.