pursuant to DRL 237, for an award of counsel fees from the other spouse in a case where there was "substantial compliance" with those requirements, the client waived her right to arbitration of the attorney's fee dispute, and counsel rendered substantial services and achieved reasonably favorable results. [FN20] FN(1) See 22 NYCRR 1400.1 and 22 NYCRR 1400.7 FN(2) , See Gair v. Peck, 6 NY2d 97. In Corletta v. Corletta, 169 Misc.2d 1, 641 N.Y.S.2d 498 (Sup. Ct, Monroe County 1996), the court found that the requirement of a written retainer agreement in 22 NYCRR 1400.3 was unconstitutional. FN(3) 22 NYCRR 136.2 FN(4) 22 NYCRR 136.8 FN(5) 22 NYCRR 136.10 FN(6) 22 NYCRR 136.4 FN(7) 22 NYCRR 136.5 FN(8) McMahon v. Evans, _____ Misc.2d _____, 645 N.Y.S.2d 753 (Sup. Ct. Broome Cty., 1996) FN(9) This rule has been repealed.
pursuant to DRL 237, for an award of counsel fees from the other spouse in a case where there was "substantial compliance" with those requirements, the client waived her right to arbitration of the attorney's fee dispute, and counsel rendered substantial services and achieved reasonably favorable results. [FN20] FN(1) See 22 NYCRR 1400.1 and 22 NYCRR 1400.7 FN(2) , See Gair v. Peck, 6 NY2d 97. In Corletta v. Corletta, 169 Misc.2d 1, 641 N.Y.S.2d 498 (Sup. Ct, Monroe County 1996), the court found that the requirement of a written retainer agreement in 22 NYCRR 1400.3 was unconstitutional. FN(3) 22 NYCRR 136.2 FN(4) 22 NYCRR 136.8 FN(5) 22 NYCRR 136.10 FN(6) 22 NYCRR 136.4 FN(7) 22 NYCRR 136.5 FN(8) McMahon v. Evans, _____ Misc.2d _____, 645 N.Y.S.2d 753 (Sup. Ct. Broome Cty., 1996) FN(9) This rule has been repealed.
fee_dispute_arbitration.docx