Practice point: The Appellate Division affirmed the Supreme Court's conclusion that the plaintiff could not
seek de novo review on the merits of an attorney-client fee dispute
that was previously submitted for arbitration. Under the terms of the
parties' retainer agreement and the Rules of the Chief Administrator of the Courts, the plaintiff's election to resolve the fee dispute by
arbitration is binding upon both attorney and
client, and reviewable pursuant to CPLR article 75. The Appellate Division found nothing in the record to supports
the plaintiff's contention that the parties modified the retainer
agreement, or elected to proceed to arbitration in a manner that was
inconsistent with the retainer agreement or 22 NYCRR Part 136.
Student note: A challenge to the confirmation of an arbitration award requires a showing that the arbitrators exceeded their power or so imperfectly
executed the arbitration that a final and definite award upon the submitted matter was not made, pursuant to CPLR 7511[b][iii].
Case: Dermigny v. Harper, NY Slip Op 02721 (2d Dept. 2015)
Here is the decision.
Tomorrow's issue: Lave to amend the complaint to assert malicious prosecution.
