Legal Malpractice, we often think, is a body of law, written by lawyers, concerning lawyers, judged by lawyers and results in decisions concerning solely lawyers.  However, sometimes this is simply not true.  Venecia V. v August V.  2013 NY Slip Op 08140  Decided on December 5, 2013 Appellate Division, First Department  Saxe, J., J. …

Small closely held corporations abound in New York, and they present a special issue for the principal of standing in legal malpractice.  Who actually hired the attorney…was it the president / owner / sole shareholder, or was it the corporate entity.  While the law is clear, Rodolico v Rubin & Licatesi, P.C. 2013 NY Slip…

Battling over the "but for" portion of the legal malpractice requirements is generally where commercial cases such as Garten v Shearman & Sterling LLP 2013 NY Slip Op 00035
Appellate Division, First Department end up. Here, in a surprisingly clear recitation, the AD tells us why this case was doomed.
 

"On an appeal from…

Sometimes events take place long after the attorney – client relationship has ended.  There are two arguments over whether the statute of limitations has run.  One is that the statute commences when the mistake is made and might be tolled by the continuous representation doctrine.  The other is that  the statute cannot commence to run…

In this legal malpractice case which was dismissed and then affirmed on appeal, the decision reveals so wide a difference in analysis of the corporate and loan documents that it is astonishing.  In Manus v Flamm   2013 NY Slip Op 07683   Decided on November 19, 2013   Appellate Division, First Department plaintiff presents a claim that…

We’re proud and pleased that the New York Law Journal published "Statute of Limitations in Legal Malpractice" today.  From the article:

"
The statute of limitations sets the maximum time during which an action for damages may be commenced. It is of ancient heritage. Its first appearance in Anglo-American law is as early as 1237.

Here is a textbook example of how the statute of limitations in legal malpractice is stretched to the extreme, yet plaintiff loses.  In 2003 defendants wrote an opinion letter which was contrary to the IRS determination which came in 2007.  Attorneys (or related attorneys) were retained in 2007 to fight the IRS and lost in…

A win at trial and a loss on Appeal in this legal malpractice case was based upon Plaintiff’s potential comparative fault.  Hattem v Smith    2013 NY Slip Op 07791  Decided on November 21, 2013  Appellate Division, Third Department is the story of a fairly straight-forward sale of a business coupled with the failure to file…