"This legal malpractice action arises out of defendants’ representation of plaintiff and his wife in an action brought by plaintiff’s former landlord, Solow Management Corp. (Solow) to recover, among other things, rent arrears in the amount of $180,313.57.

To prevail in an action to recover damages for legal malpractice, the plaintiff must establish that the defendants "failed to exercise that degree of care, skill, and diligence commonly possessed and exercised by an ordinary member of the legal community, that such negligence was the proximate cause of the actual damages sustained by the plaintiff, and that, but for the defendant’s negligence, the plaintiff would have been successful in the underlying action" (see Laventure v. Galeno, 307 AD2d 255 [2nd Dept. 2003]).

In the case at bar, there is no question that defendants’ negligently prepared and filed the CPLR3219 tenders. A trial court of coordinate jurisdiction and the Appellate Division has already ruled as such. This court is not going to entertain arguments made by defendants to the contrary. Here, no issue of facts exists, the plaintiff established his entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by demonstrating that "but for" the negligence of the defendants, they would not have incurred certain damages in the underlying action. Moreover, the discovery requested by the defendants in opposition to plaintiff’s motion is without merit. "