it is neither novel, nor a surprise that legal malpractice might come up in a complicated trust/estate/real estate/debtor-creditor case. Here, a valuable building in the meatpacking district of New York City was at issue. Romanoff v Trustees of the Sheryl Romanoff Irrevocable Grantor Trust. 2020 NY Slip Op 31150(U) May 4, 2020 Supreme Court, New
Legal Malpractice Cases
A Rare Denial of Summary Judgment in a Matrimonial Legal Malpractice Case
Matrimonial legal malpractice cases are difficult for plaintiff. Generally they end in a settlement and courts have held that mere settlement (even if effectively compelled by mistakes of counsel) will not permit a legal malpractice case to be brought. Other courts have held that the allocution which generally accompanies an in-court settlement serves to immunize…
An Excellent Primer on Legal Malpractice and CPLR 3211 Motions
Amtrust N. Am., Inc. v Pavloff 2020 NY Slip Op 31005(U) April 23, 2020 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 156855/2019 Judge: Andrew Borrok is a wonderful recapitulation of how “but for” causation, proximate cause, allegations of damage in a pre-answer motion to dismiss should be handled. All too often, judges require…
A Stay in the Action While The Details Are Sorted Out
A frequently repeated principle of legal malpractice is that the “but for” portion of the case is really where all arguments center. Few legal malpractice cases are brought where a departure by the attorney is not glaring. The more perplexing question is what would have happened if the attorney had not made a mistake. in…
It’s Always A Fight in the “But For” Arena
There are four elements to legal malpractice. In shorthand, they are departure, proximity, “but for” causation and ascertainable damages. Karambelas v Cohen Goldstein, LLP 2020 NY Slip Op 30994(U) April 2, 2020 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 15163 demonstrates how the Court will examine the underlying case (sometimes to an extreme…
A Departure with No “But For” Warrants Dismissal
In Markov v Barrows 2020 NY Slip Op 31010(U) April 20, 2020 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 158043/2019 decided by Judge Margaret A. Chan we see a well-written explanation of the tension between a departure from good practice (failing to name a party) and the requirement that the “but for” showing…
The Courts Erred and Legal Malpractice Claims are Dismissed
In Komolov v Popik 2020 NY Slip Op 30909(U) April 7, 2020 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 155100/2017 Judge: Barbara Jaffe determines that both prior Supreme Court judges and Appellate Division panels made fundamental mistakes. They each inconsistently ignored a written contract. They each applied incorrect standards to determining motions…
The Case Within A Case in Legal Malpractice
Phillips Nizer LLP v Scollar 2020 NY Slip Op 30791(U) March 13, 2020 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 154972/2017 Judge: David Benjamin Cohen is an example of how the case within a case doctrine is applied to a legal malpractice counterclaim. The law firm sued for fees and the defendant-client counterclaimed for legal…
These Almost Never Win
In a legal malpractice setting, Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment almost never wins. U Joon Sung v Park 2020 NY Slip Op 01571
Decided on March 10, 2020 Appellate Division, First Department illustrates the problem. Although liability seems obvious, Plaintiff was unable to demonstrated, prima facie that he would have succeeded in proving a…
The Will – Estate – Beneficiary Legal Malpractice Problem
It’s a chicken or the egg issue. Attorney drafts will. Will is negligently drafted. Time goes by. Will proponent dies. Beneficiary becomes executrix. Estate sues attorney drafter. Statute of limitations is raised as a defense. Was the malpractice complete at the will drafting, or was it complete when the negligent bequest becomes active?
Generally speaking,…