In the past we have often visited the subjects of legal fees and engagement letters. Two cases from 2012 suggest that there are some lessons that should be taken to heart if lawyers and their firms are to avoid, or at least minimize the scope for, disputes about whether they are entitled to a fee, and if so how it should be calculated. The first case, Asesores Y Consejeros Aconsec CIA S.A. dba Coronel Y Perez Abogados v. Global Emerging Markets North America, 841 F.Supp.2d 762 (S.D.N.Y. 2012) ( Asesores), addresses a perennial problem: How can a law firm confirm the details and scope of an engagement and protect its right to a fee where a client fails to countersign and return a properly and timely proffered engagement letter?
The second case, Toussie v. County of Suffolk , Nos. 01CV6716 (JS)(ARL), 05CV1814 (JS)(ARL), 2012 WL 3860760 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 6, 2012), explores in depth the subject of time recording and billing practices. In contrasting ways, each case suggests a different New Year’s resolution that lawyers may want to adopt.
Engagement Letter
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
