Schnur v Balestriere 2022 NY Slip Op 05297 Decided on September 27, 2022 Appellate Division, First Department describes what the First Department thinks a good Judiciary Law § 487 claim requires: deceit, egregiousness and good pleading.
“The Judiciary Law § 487 claim against Balestriere should not have been dismissed. Although “unfounded” allegations are not actionable…
In Bei Yang v. Pagan Law Firm P.C. Slip Opinion No: 2022 NY Slip Op 73132(U), Decided on October 18, 2022 the Appellate Division, First Department, determined that Plaintiff may not use a pseudonym in a legal malpractice law suit.
“And plaintiff-appellant having moved, pro se, to suppress allegedly improperly obtained privileged information of psychotherapy…
Sometimes the AD finds that a consent to change attorney is the terminating event for continuous representation and sometimes not. Ellison v Seltzer, 2022 NY Slip Op 05786
Decided on October 18, 2022 Appellate Division, First Department is a case where the “mutual understanding of the need for further representation” trumped the “failure to…
Lee v Leifer 2022 NY Slip Op 05793 Decided on October 18, 2022 Appellate Division, First Department is the startling story of an attorney who told his client that it was better and more efficient not to answer a complaint. The strategy worked well, until it didn’t.
“The Leifer defendants (Leifer) represented Lee in a…
In York v Frank 2022 NY Slip Op 05738 Decided on October 12, 2022 Appellate Division, Second Department, after discarding the statute of limitations as a reason to dismiss, the Second Department took up an alternative reason to dismiss. This was done even though the parties did not address the issue.
“Although the Supreme Court…
Courts determine when the statute of limitations begins to run against an attorney in one of two general ways. Either continuous representation ends when there is no longer a relationship of trust and confidence (acrimonious communication) or when the attorney withdraws. Both can be the basis for the onset of the statute. In York v …
Purchase at an auction at your risk. That is one of the lessons in Markov v Barrows 2022 NY Slip Op 04780 [208 AD3d 401] August 2, 2022 Appellate Division, First Department. Of course, what is true in the underlying case is true in a legal malpractice case which follows the purchase of a medal…
Curtis v Berutti 2022 NY Slip Op 22307 Decided on August 24, 2022 Supreme Court, Orange County McElduff Jr., J. illustrates two points which frequently come up in legal malpractice cases: privity and collateral estoppel. If a guardian hires an attorney to represent the guardian (and his ward) does the ward eventually have standing to…
Beneficiaries to a will can often show losses, and even damages (which are not necessarily the same), but almost always lack the standing to sue estate planning attorneys, as beneficiaries are not the Administrator or Executor(trix) of the estate. In Alford v Katz 2022 NY Slip Op 05397 Decided on September 30, 2022 Appellate Division,…
Attorneys are afforded a very wide swath of protection when they act as criminal defense attorneys. They cannot be successfully sued for legal malpractice unless the client can show that they are “free of a conviction” or demonstrate “actual innocence” That did not happen in Brooks v Shechtman 2022 NY Slip Op 33155(U) September 19,…
