N.Y. Laws » CHAPTER Judiciary / ARTICLE Attorneys and Counsellors
New York Consolidated Laws

N.Y. Judiciary Law § 491 (2026)

Sharing of compensation by attorneys prohibited

✓ text as retrieved May 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NY-LEGnysenate.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar 
§ 491. Sharing of compensation by attorneys prohibited. 1. It shall be
unlawful for any person, partnership, corporation, or association to
divide with or receive from, or to agree to divide with or receive from,
any attorney-at-law or group of attorneys-at-law, whether practicing in
this state or elsewhere, either before or after action brought, any
portion of any fee or compensation, charged or received by such
attorney-at-law or any valuable consideration or reward, as an
inducement for placing, or in consideration of having placed, in the
hands of such attorney-at-law, or in the hands of another person, a
claim or demand of any kind for the purpose of collecting such claim, or
bringing an action thereon, or of representing claimant in the pursuit
of any civil remedy for the recovery thereof. But this section does not
apply to an agreement between attorneys and counsellors-at-law to divide
between themselves the compensation to be received.
  2. Any person violating any of the provisions of this section is
guilty of a misdemeanor.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1998–2024 · leading case: Park v. DeJonge, 2024 NY Slip Op 51274(U) (N.Y. Sup. Kings 2024).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Park v. DeJonge, 2024 NY Slip Op 51274(U) (N.Y. Sup. Kings 2024). · cites it 5× “Exhibit C - Communications between Parties Affidavits of Service Miscellaneous Papers Requisitioned by Court Transcript of Proceedings, July 12, 2024 Background This action concerns whether a non-attorney who enters into a fee-splitting contract for a [*2]percentage commission…”
Ungar v. Matarazzo Blumberg & Assocs., P. C., 260 A.D.2d 485 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 1999). “Specifically, they sought to examine all the books, records, and files of MBA in accordance with the agreement. The Supreme Court granted that branch of the petition which was to compel discovery.”
Bonilla v. Rotter, 36 A.D.3d 534 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2007). “The agreement alleged by plaintiff is one between a nonlawyer and attorneys to split legal fees which is proscribed by Judiciary Law § 491. Accordingly, the agreement is illegal and plaintiff is foreclosed from seeking the assistance of the courts in enforcing it (see Prins v…”
Park v. DeJonge, 2024 NY Slip Op 51274(U) (N.Y. Sup. Kings 2024). · cites it 5× “Exhibit C - Communications between Parties Affidavits of Service Miscellaneous Papers Requisitioned by Court Transcript of Proceedings, July 12, 2024 Background This action concerns whether a non-attorney who enters into a fee-splitting contract for a [*2]percentage commission…”
Matarazzo Blumberg & Assocs., P.C. v. Abramovitz, 298 A.D.2d 586 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2002). “Contrary to the respondents’ contention, the agreement violates Judiciary Law § 491 in that it clearly contemplates the payment of a share of legal fees to a nonlawyer as compensation for the procurement of clients.”
Heer v. North Moore St. Developers, L.L.C., 140 A.D.3d 675 (N.Y. App. Div. 1st Dep't 2016). “We note that, while fee-sharing agreements between a non-attorney and attorneys are illegal and therefore unenforceable (see Judiciary Law § 491; Bonilla v Rotter, 36 AD3d 534 [1st Dept 2007]), litigation loans obtained by law firms and secured by their accounts receivable are…”
In re Felman, 259 A.D.2d 68 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 1999). “On May 28, 1997, the respondent entered a plea of guilty to a violation of Judiciary Law § 491 (prohibiting the sharing of compensation by attorneys), a serious crime within the meaning of Judiciary Law § 90 (4) (d), in the Supreme Court, Kings County.”
In re Felman, 299 A.D.2d 15 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2002). “The respondent’s prior disciplinary history consists of two letters of caution, both of which were issued in 1992, for failing to supervise his nonattorney employees, and a two-year suspension for his conviction of a serious crime, that is, the sharing of compensation by…”
In re D'Emic, 111 A.D.3d 158 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2013). · cites it 5× “On October 1, 2009, the respondent pleaded guilty in the Supreme Court, Queens County, to a violation of Judiciary Law § 491, a misdemeanor, which *160 prohibits the sharing of compensation by attorneys with non-lawyers.”
Ballan v. Sirota, 2018 NY Slip Op 5014 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2018). · cites it 3× “With respect to the merits of the appeal, Judiciary Law § 491 prohibits any person, partnership, or corporation from sharing any fee or compensation charged or received by an attorney-at-law, in consideration of having placed in the hands of such attorney-at-law a claim or…”
In re D'Emic, 111 A.D.3d 158 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 2013). · cites it 5× “On October 1, 2009, the respondent pleaded guilty in the Supreme Court, Queens County, to a violation of Judiciary Law § 491, a misdemeanor, which *160 prohibits the sharing of compensation by attorneys with non-lawyers.”
Sage v. Polansky, 251 A.D.2d 567 (N.Y. App. Div. 2d Dep't 1998). “17]; see also, Judiciary Law § 491). Copertino, J. P., Thompson, Sullivan and Friedmann, JJ.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.