Barghout v. Dweck

Full title: JAD M. BARGHOUT et al., Respondents, v. JACK S. DWECK et al., Appellants

Court: Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Nov 13, 1997

244 A.D.2d 190 (N.Y. App. Div. 1997)

664 N.Y.S.2d 914

Opinion

November 13, 1997

Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Goodman, J.).

The amended verified complaint adequately alleges the elements of a legal malpractice action, as summarized in Logalbo v. Plishkin, Rubano Baum ( 163 A.D.2d 511, 513, lv dismissed 77 N.Y.2d 940). The court properly denied defendants' motion for summary judgment as premature since it was made before issue was joined (City of Rochester v. Chiarella, 65 N.Y.2d 92, 101). Defendants' submission of various letters, memorandums and draft agreements do not establish a defense founded upon documentary evidence (CPLR 3211 [a] [1]), because they do not resolve all of the factual issues (see, Lake Placid Vil. v. Lake Placid Main St. Corp., 90 A.D.2d 873, 874).

Concur — Ellerin, J. P., Nardelli, Rubin and Mazzarelli, JJ.