It is unusual, and definitely an exception to the requirement of privity of contract between a client and the attorney in order to make a good legal malpractice claim, but such claims can be made in the absence of privity where fraud, collusion, malice or other special circumstances are alleged. Hager v Inner Circle Logistics,
Uncategorized
Not Enough For a Good Judiciary Law 487 Claim
In Sage v Neil H. Greenberg & Assoc., P.C. 2023 NY Slip Op 04787 Decided on September 27, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department there is not a lot of explanation, but the Judiciary Law 487 claim was dismissed for lack of sufficient allegations of deceit.
“Neil H. Greenberg and Associates, P.C., a law firm, and…
Not Enough In The Complaint for Legal Malpractice Claim
Jarmuth v Wagner 2023 NY Slip Op 04820 Decided on September 28, 2023 Appellate Division, First Department is the story of a co-op shareholder bringing what was in essence a derivative action against the co-op’s attorneys concerning co-op litigation. The shareholder did not succeed in pleading legal malpractice.
“To properly plead a cause of action…
Referee to Determine how Intentionally Deceitful Was Attorney Conduct
In an unique Judiciary Law 487 setting, Justice Billings has appointed a Referee to hear and determine Judiciary Law 487 claims in Papageorgiou v Consolidated Edison Co. of N.Y., Inc. 2023 NY Slip Op 33217(U) September 15, 2023 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 115106/2004.
“To the extent the motion by Flomenhaft…
Death, Brothers and Legal Malpractice
Eshaghian v Dorsey & Whitney LLP 2023 NY Slip Op 33102(U) September 6, 2023
Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 154087/2020
Judge: Shlomo S. Hagler is the inverse of a common legal malpractice trope, siblings who act badly to each other for financial reasons which then devolves into legal malpractice claims over…
The “But For” Difference in Legal Malpractice
While proximate cause is always an element of torts, we believe that the additional element of “but for” causation is unique to legal malpractice claims. “An attorney’s conduct or inaction is the proximate cause of a plaintiff’s damages if “but for” the attorney’s negligence “the plaintiff would have succeeded on the merits of…
Successive Summary Judgment Motions
Genesis Merchant Partners, LP v Gilbride, Tusa, Last & Spellane LLC 2023 NY Slip Op 33130(U) September 6, 2023 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 653145/2014 Judge: Nancy M. Bannon illustrates the general rule against multiple motions for summary judgment, even after an appellate reversal.
“In this action to recover damages, inter…
No Collateral Estoppel, No Res Judicata
Van Ravenstein v Ponder 2023 NY Slip Op 33072(U) September 6, 2023 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 161420/2019 is an interesting opinion from Judge Shlomo S. Hagler in which he rejects defenses of collateral estoppel and res judicata. Often, in similar settings, these defenses succeed.
“In the underlying action, All in…
Hiring and Firing an Accountant and Continuous Representation
In Five Towns Pediatrics, P.C. v Billet, Feit & Preis, P.C. 2023 NY Slip Op 32328(U) July 12, 2023 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: Index No. 157252/2018
Judge: Andrea Masley we see that plaintiff had a rocky course with its accountants. Claims of embezzlement, mistakes, hiring and firing abound. In the end claims…
Summary Judgment on An Accounting Malpractice Claim
NFGTV, Inc. v Lutz & Carr Certified Pub. Accountants, LLP 2023 NY Slip Op 50849(U) [79 Misc 3d 1241(A)] Decided on August 9, 2023 Supreme Court, New York County
Borrok, J. is the rare summary judgment win by a plaintiff. In this case, defendants’ own application to the IRS doomed the defense.
“NFGTV’s motion (Mtn.