The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York has ruled in the case of 11H, LLC v. Adegunle, affirming an award of $11,473 in attorney fees to the defendant. This decision, made on July 22, 2026, affects both parties involved in a dispute over a rental agreement and clarifies the application of New York's Civil Practice Law and Rules (CPLR) regarding attorney fees in breach of contract cases.
The case arose from a rental agreement between 11H, LLC, the plaintiff, and Brandon Adegunle, the defendant. The dispute began in July 2019 when 11H, LLC alleged that Adegunle breached their contract. The case was filed in Nassau County and was assigned the docket number 2023-01579. After several proceedings, the case went to trial in April 2022.
Before the trial, Adegunle served a written offer to settle the case for a specific amount, which the plaintiff did not accept. Following a nonjury trial, the court awarded the plaintiff damages totaling $3,910.60, which was less than the settlement offer made by Adegunle. This prompted Adegunle to seek an award for attorney fees and costs under CPLR 3220, which allows for such fees if the plaintiff fails to obtain a more favorable judgment than the offer made.
The court ruled in favor of Adegunle, stating that the award of attorney fees was justified under CPLR 3220. The ruling emphasized that the defendant's offer was made in compliance with the law and that the plaintiff's failure to accept it led to the award of attorney fees. The court noted, "The expenses shall be ascertained by the judge or referee before whom the case is tried," confirming that the judge has the discretion to determine reasonable attorney fees.
Judge Colleen D. Duffy, along with Justices William G. Ford, Laurence L. Love, and Donna-Marie E. Golia, concurred in the decision. They affirmed the lower court's ruling without costs or disbursements to either party. The court's decision clarified that the term "expenses" in CPLR 3220 includes attorney fees, and the determination of what constitutes a reasonable fee is at the discretion of the court.
This ruling has important implications for future breach of contract cases in New York. It reinforces the idea that defendants can recover attorney fees if they make a reasonable settlement offer that is not accepted by the plaintiff, and the plaintiff fails to achieve a better outcome at trial. This sets a precedent for how courts may handle similar cases in the future, encouraging parties to consider settlement offers seriously before proceeding to trial.
The decision also serves as a reminder for plaintiffs to evaluate the potential costs of litigation against the benefits of accepting settlement offers. It highlights the risks involved in pursuing a case to trial when a reasonable offer has been made, as the financial burden may shift to the plaintiff if they do not achieve a more favorable outcome.
As for what’s next, it is unclear if 11H, LLC plans to appeal the ruling. The court's decision is final unless challenged in a higher court. There are no related cases pending that were mentioned in the court filing.