Interest fee

The language of the contract on the recovery of attorneys’ fees must be clearly stated

After six years as head of the New York State Court of Appeals and judiciary, Chief Justice Janet DiFiore resigned on August 31, 2022. The remaining six justices of the Court of Appeals chose the hon. Anthony Cannataro will serve as acting chief justice until a successor is nominated by Governor Kathy Hochul and confirmed by the state Senate. Much has been written about the ideological divide between the six Court of Appeals justices and the impact of the Governor’s selection of a new Chief Justice on the Court’s jurisprudence. So far, the Court appears to be taking a measured approach. The Court has issued about a dozen decisions since Chief Justice DiFiore’s resignation and in all but one of those decisions as of this writing, the Court was unanimous in its vote and 5-1 in the remaining case.

In one such unanimous decision, the Court of Appeals ruled last month that the language of a contract must be express and “undoubtedly clear” in order to prove the parties’ intention to indemnify each other for costs. counsel in an action between the parties. In Wise system. c.Lissa decision written by Judge Jenny Rivera, the Court determined that broad, unrestrictive indemnification language in a contract did not sufficiently demonstrate the clear intention of the parties to provide attorneys’ fees related to direct claims between them as opposed to third party claims.