No. 72
Amnon Goldstein,
Respondent, v. AccuScan, Inc., et al.,
Appellants.
2004 NY Int. 79
June 3, 2004
This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
publication in the New York Reports.
David L. Birch, for appellants. Edward D. Loughman, III, for respondent.
MEMORANDUM:
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed,
with costs.
“[W]hen parties set down their agreement in a clear,
complete document, their writing should as a rule be enforced
according to its terms” ( Signature Realty, Inc. v Tallman (__
NY3d __ 2004 NY Slip Op ___, at 2 [decided today] [quoting R/S
Assoc. v New York Job Dev. Auth., , 98 NY2d 29, 32 [2002]). The
parties' agreement states that AccuScan Inc. shall pay its
consultant, Amnon Goldstein, “10% of all amounts received” by
AccuScan in excess of $4 million in settlements obtained or
license fees awarded regarding certain patents. AccuScan argues
that “all amounts received,” in fact, means all amounts received
net of attorneys' fees. As the Appellate Division correctly
observed, however, the contract's clear language does not admit
of this qualification (307 2 913, 914 [2d Dept 2003]).
Finally, the existence of an attorney's charging lien does not
alter AccuScan's contractual obligation to Goldstein.