From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cohen v. Law Offices of Leonard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 3, 2005
18 A.D.3d 219 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)

Opinion

5995.

May 3, 2005.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara R. Kapnick, J.), entered March 19, 2004, which denied plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and granted defendants' cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Before: Mazzarelli, J.P., Sullivan, Ellerin, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ., concur.


Plaintiffs failed to establish that but for counsel's alleged malpractice, they would have prevailed on appeal and would not have incurred damages upon remand to the federal District Court. Where legal malpractice is alleged, the "failure to establish proximate cause requires dismissal regardless of whether negligence is established" ( Russo v. Feder, Kaszovitz, Isaacson, Weber, Skala Bass, 301 AD2d 63, 67). Plaintiffs also failed to establish a chronic or extreme pattern of legal delinquency that would warrant civil relief and the imposition of treble damages pursuant to Judiciary Law § 487 ( Markard v. Bloom, 4 AD3d 128, lv denied 2 NY3d 706).


Summaries of

Cohen v. Law Offices of Leonard

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 3, 2005
18 A.D.3d 219 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
Case details for

Cohen v. Law Offices of Leonard

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT S. COHEN et al., Appellants, v. LAW OFFICES OF LEONARD ROBERT…

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

Date published: May 3, 2005

Citations

18 A.D.3d 219 (N.Y. App. Div. 2005)
793 N.Y.S.2d 764

Citing Cases

Nason v. Fisher

O'Connell v. Kerson, 291 A.D.2d 386, 387 (2nd Dep't 2002). See also, Cohen v. Law Offices of Leonard Robert…

Strumwasser v. Zeiderman

"[plaintiff has] failed to establish a chronic or extreme pattern of legal delinquency that would warrant…