Privity, a concept which applies to almost no contractual relationships anymore, is the overriding reason that the legal malpractice claims in this case were dismissed. Once upon a time, privity was necessary in order to win a products liability case. No more is it necessary. Once upon a time, privity was necessary in a variety
Uncategorized
Our Statute of Limitations Article in the NY Law Journal
We’re proud to post a new article that appeared in the New York Law Journal today on The Statute of Limitations in Legal Malpractice.
A new development in the legal malpractice world is the rise of arbitration clauses in retainer agreements. Will it change the landscape?
Ratification, Collateral Estoppel and Legal Malpractice
A constant in legal malpractice litigation is the fact that it always arises from a former representation of the client by the attorney. How does the underlying record influence or limit the scope of legal malpractice. Take the example of a company getting information from its attorney and acting on that information. Assume that the…
It’s An Exacting Standard, and Lawyers Benefit From the Protection
Legal malpractice claims, in contradistinction to all other professional negligence claims, enjoy an extra layer of protection for the attorney. Not only must one find a departure from good practice, which proximately damaged the client, but (and only in legal malpractice) one must meet the “exacting standard” that but for the attorney’s negligence the outcome…
False Answers and Lawyering Did Not Implicate Judiciary Law 487
Judiciary Law 487 is the lawyer deceit common law, imported from the Magna Carta era. It is the oldest Anglo-American common law, and has recently been the subject of several NYS Court of Appeals rulings. In Kuruwa v 130E. 18 Owners Corp. 2014 NYSlipOp 06880 [121 AD3d 472]
October 9, 2014 Appellate Division, First…
The Fluid Statute of Limitations in Legal Malpractice
We’ve written over and over that the statute of limitations in legal malpractice is 3 years pursuant to CPLR 214(6) and aside from continuing representation, there is no possible extension. There is no discovery statute of limitations, and the statute is commenced when the mistake is made. We have been absolutely solid on that until…
A “Conveniently Tailored” Legal Malpractice Complaint is Dismissed
Plaintiffs run a marina, and are hounded by the Town of Carmel. Apparently the Town does not like how they are running the marina. The problem for the town is that it does not have jurisdiction over the marina. Hence, its criminal and civil zoning cases are defective. Plaintiffs resist for years and then sue…
Privity is a Very Inflexible Rule in Legal Malpractice
Only clients may sue their attorney in legal malpractice. It really does not matter (so much) whether the attorney made a mistake that hurt you. What matters is whether you (and that means you, not your father) hired the attorney. So, beneficiaries to estates that don’t get what they should can rarely sue the attorney…
Trustees and Privity
Trustees, just like regular prople, put their trust in attorneys. After all, the attorney can be trusted to take care of the details, no? Anyway, the attorney is sure to send a bill. In this situation, the trust in the attorneys rigor was misplaced.
Ianiro v Bachman 2015 NY Slip Op 06709 Decided on September…
Professional Negligence in the Creative World
Augustus Butera is a photographer whose work was handled by the former MCA Creative Services, which self-immolated some time back. In Augustus Butera Photography, Inc. v MCA Creative Servs., Inc.2014 NY Slip Op 32974(U) October 21, 2014 Supreme Court, New York County Docket Number: 651984/11 Judge Nancy M. Bannon gives a primer on the…