Procedure is king in legal malpractice and elsewhere.  How does a good case end up in Civil Court.  Sometimes an inexperienced practitioner, or a pro-se litigant who is trying to save $ 175 might start the case in Civil Court rather than Supreme, and sometimes a judge will transfer the case pursuant to CPLR 325d rather than handle it (or sometimes to punish plaintiff’s attorney.)

Here, in Global Bus. Inst. v Rivkin Radler, LLP ; 2011 NY Slip Op 01941 ; Decided on March 17, 2011 ; Appellate Division, First Department  we see plaintiff’s attorney successfully get the case back to Supreme Court. 
 

"The motion court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying plaintiff’s motion. Leave to amend the pleadings is freely granted, absent prejudice (see Mandel, Resnik & Kaiser, P.C. v E.I. Elecs., Inc., 41 AD3d 386, 388 [2007]; see also Loomis v Civetta Corinno Constr. Corp., 54 NY2d 18 [1981]), and plaintiff has stated, at this juncture, a cognizable claim against defendant law firm for failure to sufficiently advise it of the consequences of the tax escalation clause in the lease it eventually executed with its landlord several months after retaining defendant (see Escape Airports (USA), Inc. v Kent, Beatty & Gordon, LLP, 79 AD3d 437 [2010]). Furthermore, in view of the foregoing and the additional damages sought, the matter should be transferred to Supreme Court (see Firequench, Inc. v Kaplan, 256 AD2d 213 [1998]). "