| Mintz & Gold, LLP v Hart |
| 2008 NY Slip Op 01311 [48 AD3d 526] |
| February 13, 2008 |
| Appellate Division, Second Department |
| Mintz & Gold, LLP, Respondent, v Penny Fern Hart,Appellant. |
—[*1] Reisman, Peirez & Reisman, LLP, Garden City, N.Y. (Jerome Reisman of counsel), forrespondent.
In an action, inter alia, to recover unpaid legal fees, the defendant appeals, as limited by hernotice of appeal and brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County(Warshawsky, J.), entered May 25, 2006, as granted that branch of the plaintiff's motion whichwas to strike her seventh affirmative defense, and denied those branches of her cross motionwhich were, in effect, for summary judgment dismissing the first through fifth causes of action inthe complaint based on the lack of a written letter of engagement.
Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with costs.
Contrary to the appellant's contention, the absence of a written letter of engagement orretainer agreement does not preclude the plaintiff law firm from collecting legal fees on the factspresented (see Seth Rubenstein, P.C. vGanea, 41 AD3d 54, 60 [2007]; 22 NYCRR 1215.1 [a]; 1215.2 [b]).
The parties' remaining contentions either are without merit or have been rendered academicby our determination in Mintz & Gold, LLP v Hart (48 AD3d 526 [2008] [decidedherewith]). Lifson, J.P., Ritter, Angiolillo and Carni, JJ., concur.