Our mission is to cover and report every legal malpractice case we can fine.  In Kings County, there are fewer decisions published electronically than in other places.  So, when the Appellate Division rules without giving any of the underlying facts, we traditionally go to the electronic filing system, and if the case is too old, to WebCivilSupreme.  However, the only published decisions in Seidman v Einig & Bush LLP  2017 NY Slip Op 05257  Decided on June 28, 2017  Appellate Division, ,Second Department are old Orders to Show Cause.  So, motion denied, decision affirmed, no reasons or facts.

“Here, the Supreme Court properly denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint (see Rosenstrauss v Jacobs & Jacobs, 56 AD3d 453, 454; Velie v Ellis Law, P.C., 48 AD3d 674, 675; Pedro v Walker, 46 AD3d 789, 790). The defendants failed to make a prima facie showing of their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law since they failed to show that the plaintiff was unable to prove at least one of the essential elements of his legal malpractice cause of action (see Rosenstrauss v Jacobs & Jacobs, 56 AD3d at 454; Velie v Ellis Law, P.C., 48 AD3d at 675; Pedro v Walker, 46 AD3d at 790). Thus, we need not address the sufficiency of the opposing papers (see Winegrad v New York Univ. Med. Ctr., 64 NY2d 851, 853).”