Cherry v Koehler & Isaacs LLP
Annotate this CaseDecided on June 12, 2012
Saxe, J.P., Catterson, Acosta, DeGrasse, Richter, JJ.
7902 310302/09
[*1]Bernard Cherry, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v
Koehler & Isaacs LLP, et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Bernard Cherry, appellant pro se.
Koehler & Isaacs LLP, New York (Howard Wien of counsel),
for respondents.
Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Wilma Guzman, J.), entered on or about October 26, 2010, which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7), unanimously affirmed, without costs.
The motion court properly concluded that this action could not be maintained against defendants, the counsel hired by plaintiff's union to represent him in the disciplinary proceedings prior to his termination from the Department of Correction (see Mamorella v Derkasch, 276 AD2d 152, 155 [2000]).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions, including that he himself had retained defendants, and find them unavailing.
THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER
OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.
ENTERED: JUNE 12, 2012
CLERK
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.