Case ID: ad3d_82/html/0479-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Leslie Marcano et al., Plaintiffs, v U-Haul Co. of Virginia et al., Defendants. Arthur J. Grosshandler, Nonparty Petitioner-Appellant, v Tiger & Daguanno, L.L.P., Nonparty Respondent-Respondent.
    [918 NYS2d 340]
   The referee’s findings are supported by the record (see Baker v Kohler, 28 AD3d 375, 375-376 [2006], lv denied 7 NY3d 885 [2006]). Plaintiffs subjective satisfaction speaks to the relative quality of the attorneys’ services, a relevant factor in apportioning the fee (see Diakrousis v Maganga, 61 AD3d 469 [2009]). The record establishes that appellant’s contributions were duly considered by the referee and the court.

We have considered appellant’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.P., Sweeny, Renwick, Freedman and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.