Magistrate Judge Henry Pitman
Nimkoff Rosenfeld & Schechter (Nimkoff) sought fees owed for representing RKO Properties in state court (the Boymelgreen Action). Defendant was represented by Herzfeld & Rubin (H&R). Denying that it owed Nimkoff money, RKO claimed Nimkoff committed legal malpractice. Both Nimkoff and RKO sought discovery from H&R. They claimed fact disputes existed as to what happened during negotiations to settle the Boymelgreen Action, including whether a fee agreement between Nimkoff and RKO was modified. Only partly granting both applications, the court closed further deposition of H&R’s senior attorney Rubin. Both Nimkoff and RKO questioned Rubin on topics having minimal relevance to the issues in their lawsuit. RKO spent inordinate time examining Rubin on unrelated matters. Noting that the fee agreement between Nimkoff and RKO was a private arrangement, the court observed that there was no indication that Rubin, or any other H&R attorney, was privy to its details. Despite limiting Nimkoff and RKO to 20 written interrogatories to obtain discovery from H&R’s attorneys Ceresney and Strauss, the court deemed it doubtful either could provide information relevant to the fee dispute or malpractice claim.