Cases This Week in Legal Malpractice
Frederick Rehberger, appellant, v Garguilo & Orzechowski, LLP, et al., respondents.
(Index No. 30120/05)
2007-05158
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT
2008 NY Slip Op 3187;
April 8, 2008, Decided
Plaintiff’s Suffolk County case dismissed on 3211(a)(5) grounds, and reversed upon adequate showing of continuous representation.
Milton B. Shapiro, etc., respondent, v Deborah Shapiro Kurtzman, appellant, et al., defendants. (Index No. 7875/01)
2007-01139, 2007-07057
SUPREME COURT OF NEW YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT
2008 NY Slip Op 3194;
April 8, 2008, Decided
Borrower successfully moves to dismiss case against lender based on failure in discovery. Lender moves to vacate on the basis that its attorney retired from practice suffering from Alzheimer’s syndrome. Court vacates, but imposes a $ 10,000 sanction. Queery: how did the lender get its attorney’s medical/psychiatric records? Now did it present this info to the court? Why a big sanction?