Opinion
May 30, 1995
Appeal from the Surrogate's Court, Suffolk County (Signorelli, S.).
Ordered that the appeal from the decision is dismissed since no appeal lies from a decision (see, Matter of Zlobec, 133 A.D.2d 637) ; and it is further,
Ordered that the decree is affirmed insofar as appealed from; and it is further,
Ordered that the respondent is awarded one bill of costs to be paid by the appellant personally.
It is well established that "the Surrogate bears the ultimate responsibility to decide what constitutes reasonable legal compensation * * * regardless of the existence of a retainer agreement * * * or whether all the interested parties have consented to the amount of fees requested" (Matter of Verplanck, 151 A.D.2d 767; see also, Matter of Stortecky v Mazzone, 85 N.Y.2d 518; Matter of Phelan, 173 A.D.2d 621). No hard-and-fast rule exists by which it can be determined what is reasonable compensation for an attorney in any given case (see, Matter of Bobeck, 196 A.D.2d 496). The Surrogate, however, may consider a number of factors including "`the time spent, the difficulties involved in the matters in which the services were rendered, the nature of the services, the amount involved, the professional standing of the counsel, and the results obtained'" (Matter of Bobeck, supra, at 497, quoting Matter of Potts, 213 App. Div. 59, 62, affd 241 N.Y. 593). Moreover, the Surrogate is not bound to accept at face value an attorney's summary of the hours that he spent working on legal matters (see, Matter of Bobeck, supra).
Under the circumstances of this case, the Surrogate did not improvidently exercise his discretion by awarding $25,000 to J. Arthur Robbins for the legal services that he rendered to the decedent's estate. Sullivan, J.P., Miller, Santucci and Altman, JJ., concur.