Adams v Pulvers, Pulvers & Thompson, L.L.P. 2022 NY Slip Op 30160(U)
January 19, 2022 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 154594/2021 holds that while the case was timely filed, it does not adequately say that if the underlying personal injury case had gone forward, plaintiff would have won.
“Here, Plaintiffs malpractice claim is insufficiently pleaded against Defendants because the Complaint fails to set forth any specific facts or submit any proof to establish the “but for”
causation element, i.e., that “but for” Defendants’ alleged negligence, Plaintiff would have prevailed in an action arising from the underlying claim against the City and State of New York, the Metropolitan Transit Authority, and/or Consolidated Edison. There was a notice of claim filed against the City of New York, which held a 50-h hearing, before Defendants were even retained and Plaintiff does not allege whether or how he would have prevailed against the City but for Defendants’ negligence. Further, Plaintiff could have brought an action against Consolidated Edison until March 15, 2020 (see CPLR 214), which is a year after Defendants allegedly told Plaintiff that they failed to bring an action on his behalf.”