Pincus v. Wells

• Citation: 826 N.Y.S.2d 423,35 A.D.3d 569,2006 NY Slip Op 09439
• Decision Date: 12 December 2006
• Docket Number: 2005-07331.,2005-06835.,2005-08495.,2005-06833.,2005-06209.,No. 30158/03.,30158/03.
• Parties: ROBERT PINCUS, Appellant, v. HELEN L. WELLS et al., Respondents.
• Court: New York Supreme Court Appellate Division

35 A.D.3d 569

826 N.Y.S.2d 423

2006 NY Slip Op 09439

ROBERT PINCUS, Appellant, v. HELEN L. WELLS et al., Respondents.

2005-06209.

2005-06833.

2005-06835.

2005-07331.

2005-08495.

No. 30158/03.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Second Department.

Decided December 12, 2006.

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for defamation, the plaintiff appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Douglass, J.), dated May 25, 2005, which granted the defendants' separate motions pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (7) to dismiss the amended complaint insofar as asserted against them, (2) an order of the same court dated June 15, 2005, which after a hearing, directed him to pay Helen L. Wells, Esq., the sum of $24,625 for attorney's fees and expenses incurred in defending the action on behalf of the defendant Helen L. Wells, (3) an order of the same court, dated June 15, 2005, which, after a hearing, directed him to pay the law firm of Reingold & Tucker the sum of $35,539 for attorney's fees and expenses incurred in defending the action on behalf of the defendant Mootze Michel-Roache, (4) an order of the same court dated July 26, 2005, which, after a hearing, directed him to pay Robert Washington, Esq., the sum of $11,649 for attorney's fees and expenses incurred in defending the action on behalf of the defendant Concord Baptist Church and, (5) a judgment of the same court dated July 7, 2005, which, upon the order dated June 15, 2005 directing him to pay the law firm of Reingold & Tucker the sum of $35,539, is in favor of the law

firm of Reingold & Tucker and against him in the sum of $35,539.

Ordered that the appeal from the order dated June 15, 2005, directing the plaintiff to pay the law firm of Reingold & Tucker the sum of $35,539, is dismissed; and it is further,

Ordered that on the Court's own motion, the notice of appeal from the order dated June 15, 2005, directing the plaintiff to pay Helen L. Wells, Esq., the sum of $24,625, and the notice of appeal from the order dated July 26, 2005 are treated as applications for leave to appeal from those orders, and leave to appeal is granted (see CPLR 5701 [c]); and it is further,

Ordered that the orders dated May 25, 2005 and July 26, 2005, and the order dated June 15, 2005, directing the plaintiff to pay Helen L. Wells, Esq., the sum of $24,625, are affirmed, and it is further,

Ordered that the judgment dated July 7, 2005 is modified, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, by deleting the sum of $35,539, and substituting therefor the sum of $26,199; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed, and the order dated June 15, 2005, directing the plaintiff to pay the law firm of Reingold & Tucker the sum of $35,539, is modified accordingly; and it is further,

Ordered that one bill of costs is awarded to the defendants appearing separately and filing separate briefs.

The appeal from the intermediate order dated June 15, 2005 directing the plaintiff to pay the law firm of Reingold & Tucker the sum of $35,539, must be dismissed because...