Ambiguous Retainer Equals No Fee

A federal judge has ruled that New York law requires a lawyer’s ambiguous retainer agreement to be read in favor of the client.

As a result, Barry Fredericks won’t be able to collect a contingency fee for a case that lost on a motion for summary judgment, then settled while an appeal was pending, the New York Law Journal reports. The appeal had been filed by another lawyer.

Fredericks represented a company in a contract dispute with Slim-Fast over an agreement to distribute products in Israel.

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy and the ABA Code of Conduct.

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.