The dreaded thin letter is no different from the short appellate decision. It bodes poorly for the applicant. Bautista v Hach & Rose, LLP 2019 NY Slip Op 07528 Decided on October 22, 2019 Appellate Division, First Department. Here is the entire decision (no edits):
“Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lucindo Suarez, J.), entered October 26, 2018, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, denied defendant Hach & Rose, LLP’s (defendant) motion to dismiss plaintiff’s cause of action for legal malpractice against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.
We decline to entertain defendant’s arguments, which were improperly raised for the first time on appeal.
Were we to reach those arguments, we would nevertheless find that plaintiff’s allegations supported an inference of proximate causation and the documentary evidence did not refute those allegations (CPLR 3211[a], ; Brooks v Lewin, 21 AD3d 731, 734 [1st Dept 2005], lv denied 6 NY3d 713 ; cf. Somma v Dansker & Aspromonte Assoc., 44 AD3d 376, 377 [1st Dept 2007]; Alden v Brindisi, Murad, Brindisi, Pearlman, Julian & Pertz [“The People’s Lawyer”], 91 AD3d 1311, 1311 [4th Dept 2012]).”