On December 29, 2025, Justice Doyle of the Monroe County Commercial Division issued a decision in Samson MCA LLC v. Salco Landscape Servs. Inc., 2025 NY Slip Op. 35234(U), holding that an attorney fees award must be based on the work done, not a percentage of the amount at issue, explaining:
Plaintiff sufficiently alleges entitlement in general to attorneys’ fees. However, the Court agrees that to the extent Plaintiff seeks a specified percentage of fees calculated from the balance due, Plaintiff does not set forth a plausible right to recovery. An award of attorneys’ fees pursuant to such a contractual provision may only be enforced to the extent that the amount is reasonable and warranted for the services actually rendered. The fixed percentage fee, therefore, is viewed only as a maximum fee, limiting the amount of reasonable attorneys’ fees which the creditor may charge upon proving the extent of the necessary services actually rendered. Mead v. First Tr. & Deposit Co., 60 A.D.2d 71, 78 (4th Dept. 1977). The Fourth Department continued:
We note that it is not the intent of the law, nor of the petitioner in this proceeding, to deprive the creditor of full payment of its actual necessary legal expenses in collecting the defaulted debt, limited only by the reasonable value of such services and the percentage provision expressed in the contract. The aim is to prevent creditors and their attorneys from receiving more than such sums, which they may otherwise be able to accomplish because of the debtors’ defaults.
To the extent Plaintiff seeks a flat fee percentage of the balance due as attorneys’ fees, the motion to dismiss is warranted. Attorneys’ fees will be awarded only upon the demonstration of time spent bolstered by documentary evidence.
(Internal quotations and citations omitted).