Musachio v. Musachio
| Decision Date | 25 January 2011 |
| Parties | Mark MUSACHIO, plaintiff, v. Annmarie MUSACHIO, appellant; Kenneth J. Weinstein, nonparty-respondent. |
| Court | New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division |
Annmarie Musachio, Kings Park, N.Y., appellant pro se.
In an action for a divorce and ancillary relief, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Bivona, J.), dated September 21, 2009, which, inter alia, granted that branch of the motion of the nonparty, Kenneth J. Weinstein, which was for leave to withdraw as her counsel.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
"The decision to grant or deny permission for counsel to withdraw lies within the discretion of the trial court, and the court's decision should not be overturned absent a showing of an improvident exercise of discretion" ( Cashdan v. Cashdan, 243 A.D.2d 598, 598, 663 N.Y.S.2d 271; see Ben-Yu Zhan v. Sun Wing Wo Realty Corp., 208 A.D.2d 668, 617 N.Y.S.2d 523). Based upon the papers submitted in support of and in opposition to the motion of the defendant's counsel for leave to withdraw and the record of proceedings on the motion, the Supreme Court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in permitting counsel to withdraw on the grounds of the defendant's nonpayment of legal fees and a breakdown in the attorney-client relationship ( see Misek-Falkoff v. Metropolitan Tr. Auth., 65 A.D.3d 576, 883 N.Y.S.2d 722; Weiss v. Spitzer, 46 A.D.3d 675, 848 N.Y.S.2d 237; Winters v. Winters, 25 A.D.3d 601, 807 N.Y.S.2d 302; Kay v. Kay, 245 A.D.2d 549, 666 N.Y.S.2d 728; Galvano v. Galvano, 193 A.D.2d 779, 598 N.Y.S.2d 268; Stephen Eldridge Realty Corp. v. Green, 174 A.D.2d 564, 570 N.Y.S.2d 677; Rules of Professional Conduct [22 NYCRR 1200.0 rule 1.16[c][5], [7]]).
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Diaz v. N.Y. Comprehensive Cardiology, PLLC
...883 N.Y.S.2d 722 [2d Dept.2009] ) and a “breakdown in the attorney-client relationship” ( see Musachio v. Musachio, 80 A.D.3d 738, 738, 915 N.Y.S.2d 497 [2d Dept.2011] ), in the cited cases based upon nonpayment of legal fees. Here, it became apparent on the hearing of counsel's motion that......
-
Alvarado–vargas v. 6422 Holding Corp..
...exercise of discretion” ( Cashdan v. Cashdan, 243 A.D.2d 598, 598, 663 N.Y.S.2d 271; see Musachio v. Musachio, 80 A.D.3d 738, 915 N.Y.S.2d 497; Ben–Yu Zhan v. Sun Wing Wo Realty Corp., 208 A.D.2d 668, 617 N.Y.S.2d 523). Here, in light of Forthright's lack of opposition to its own law firm's......
-
Aragona V v. Shaibani
...have been granted (see Alvardo–Vargas v. 6422 Holding Corp., 85 A.D.3d 829, 830, 925 N.Y.S.2d 176 ; Musachio v. Musachio, 80 A.D.3d 738, 915 N.Y.S.2d 497 ; Winters v. Winters, 25 A.D.3d at 602, 807 N.Y.S.2d 302...
-
Zutt v. State
...Court properly directed the defendant to comply with the recommendations of the plaintiffs' expert to direct storm water away from915 N.Y.S.2d 497the plaintiffs' property and into a natural stream nearby. PRUDENTI, P.J., ANGIOLILLO, FLORIO and SGROI, JJ.,...