McCloskey v. Bril
| Decision Date | 27 April 1956 |
| Citation | 1 N.Y.2d 755,152 N.Y.S.2d 301,135 N.E.2d 53 |
| Parties | , 135 N.E.2d 53 John J. McCLOSKEY, Sheriff of the City of New York, Respondent, v. Ephraim BRIL, doing business as Trans-America Commodity Exchange, Defendant, and Maurice Lutwack, Appellant. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 286 App.Div. 143, 142 N.Y.S.2d 5.
Sheriff brought action against an attorney and his client for poundage fees arising from a levy on a warrant of attachment, which was subsequently vacated.
The Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County, Eugene L. Brisach, J., entered summary judgment in favor of the sheriff, and the attorney appealed.
The Appellate Division, 286 App.Div. 143, 142 N.Y.S.2d 5, affirmed the judgment, and held that where attorney, at whose instance warrant of attachment was issued, filed warrant of attachment with sheriff, and, after sheriff levied on property, warrant of attachment was vacated, and sheriff returned the property, attorney was liable for poundage fees to sheriff.
The Appellate Division, 286 App.Div. 143, 144 N.Y.S.2d 915, granted motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals.
The attorney appealed to the Court of Appeals, contending that rule which makes an attorney personally liable for poundage where a warrant of attachment has been vacated should be changed, and that general rule which protects an agent for a disclosed principal from acquiring any personal liability should be re-established in connection with lawyers, as agents, and their clients, as principals, and that when the reason for a rule no longer exists, the rule must go the way of the reason.
Edward M. Sheehan, Buffalo (Robert Liebman, Buffalo, of counsel), for defendant-appellant.
Sidney Posner, New York City (Sidney Posner, New York City, A. G. Grayzel, Brooklyn, of counsel), for plaintiff-respondent.
Judgment affirmed, with costs.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
In re McMahon
...(1874); Van Kirk v. Sedgwick, 87 N.Y. 265, 271 (1881); McCloskey v. Bril, 286 A.D. 143, 142 N.Y.S.2d 5 (1955); aff'd. 1 N.Y.2d 755, 152 N.Y.S.2d 301, 135 N.E.2d 53 (1956); Myers v. Grove, 242 A.D. 637, 272 N.Y.S. 162 (1934). Consequently, Reardon is entitled to collect payment for poundage ......
-
Comm'rs of the State Ins. Fund v. Augusto Garcia, Scalzi & Nofi PLLC
...) or for fees to a sheriff for execution of process (McCloskey v. Bril, 286 A.D. 143, 142 N.Y.S.2d 5 [1st Dept.1955] aff'd 1 N.Y.2d 755, 152 N.Y.S.2d 301, 152 N.Y.S.2d 301, 135 N.E.2d 53 [1956] ). The holding of the Court in this matter is a consistent application of the same guiding princi......
- People v. Bonino
-
C. C. Plumb Mixes, Inc. v. Stone
...the service of process. Tarbell v. Dickinson, 3 Cushing 345; McCloskey v. Bril, 286 App.Div. 143, 142 N.Y.S.2d 5, aff'd, 1 N.Y.2d 755, 152 N.Y.S.2d 301, 135 N.E.2d 53. For an informative review of the law relative to an attorney's personal liability for expenses incurred in relation to serv......