In Provenzano v Cellino & Barnes, P.C. 2022 NY Slip Op 04749 Decided on July 27, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department we see an illustration of the “no harm-no foul” spirit of legal malpractice. Sure, an attorney may make a mistake, depart from good practice or fail to explore an avenue of recovery, but if
Legal Malpractice Cases
Already Decided Once and Patently Devoid of Merit
In this odd case, Feng Li v Shih 2022 NY Slip Op 04293 Decided on July 6, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department Plaintiff is an attorney who was disbarred in New Jersey and suspended in New York. He turns around and sues another attorney claiming that the proceedings in New Jersey were malicious, an abuse…
Documents Kill the Legal Malpractice Case
Frydco Capital Group, LLC v Carlton Fields, P.A. 2022 NY Slip Op 02619 [204 AD3d 532] April 21, 2022 Appellate Division, First Department is a picture of two wholly different stories. Plaintiff’s story survived a motion to dismiss, only to be vanquished by Defendants’ story on appeal.
“The legal malpractice claims should have been dismissed…
Too Late For Some Claims, Not Too Late For Others
Previously, we looked at the Judiciary Law § 487 claims. Legal Malpractice Claims were also brought in Joseph v Fensterman 2022 NY Slip Op 02398 [204 AD3d 766] April 13, 2022
Appellate Division, Second Department.
“Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the Supreme Court properly granted that branch of the defendants’ motion which was to dismiss…
Errors, Yes, but Inconsequential
Kutzin v Katz 2022 NY Slip Op 04595 Decided on July 14, 2022 Appellate Division, Third Department is an example of the minute detailed examination which is made to the record in a legal malpractice case. Plaintiff loses.
“In May 2016, plaintiff retained defendant to represent him in drafting a marital settlement agreement. Among other…
No Harm, No Foul in Legal Malpractice Setting
Ward v Klein 2022 NY Slip Op 02153 [203 AD3d 1216] March 30, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department represents the “no harm-no foul” analysis frequently applied to legal malpractice claims. Attorneys are allowed to withdraw from representation and often do. This fact pattern consistently appears in medical malpractice cases at about the time that the…
Relying on the Consent to Change Attorney Date
Continuous representation tolls the running of the statute of limitations, which commences when the attorney mistake is made. Continuous representation exists because it is inequitable to require a client to sue its attorney while the case is still ongoing. That said, there are many requirements as can be seen in Walsh v Wallace Law Off. …
Mistakes, But Many Years to Rectify and Collect
Weis v Rheem, Bell & Freeman, LLP 2022 NY Slip Op 31203(U) April 12, 2022 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 160796/2020 Judge: Barbara Jaffe is a example of how courts burrow into the “but for” portion of the legal malpractice claim.
“Plaintiffs allege that in or about April 2015, plaintiff Weis…
Timely, But Court Dismisses Anyway
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…
Dual Motions for Summary Judgment, Dual Denials
Alphas v Smith 2022 NY Slip Op 30722(U) March 7, 2022 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 155790/2015 Judge: Lewis J. Lubell presents the situation in which both plaintiff and defendant file motions for summary judgment, each supported by experts. In the duel of the experts, the dual motions are both denied.…