On July 1, 2014, the New York Court of Appeals definitively ended the debate concerning whether matters billed on an hourly basis after a law firm’s dissolution are the property of a dissolved law firm subject to a claim that they constitute “unfinished business.” In determining that a law firm’s pending hourly fee matters are not subject to claims of unfinished business, the Court of Appeals not only clarified New York’s Partnership Law but, perhaps having more widespread effect, reiterated New York’s strong public policy in favor of client choice of counsel and lawyer mobility.
The decision is among the most important determinations from the Court of Appeals affecting lawyers, and impacts large and small law firms, law firm partners, and clients. In this month’s column, we analyze the Court of Appeals decision in Geron v. Seyfarth Shaw (In re Thelen)1 and discuss some of the decision’s immediate and long-term implications.
