From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Gamiel v. Sullivan Liapakis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 13, 2001
289 A.D.2d 88 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)

Opinion

4840N

December 13, 2001.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Diane Lebedeff, J.), entered February 2, 2000, which, in an action for legal malpractice, insofar as appealed from, directed defendant-appellant to produce certain documents it generated in connection with its representation of plaintiff, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Robert Curtis, for plaintiff-respondent.

Stephen C. Glasser, for defendant-appellant.

Before: Williams, J.P., Mazzarelli, Andrias, Saxe, JJ.


The subject documents should be disclosed since they are material and necessary, and either contain matter beyond an attorney's private thoughts in describing specific occurrences personally known to the attorney, or do not contain any indication that they served to "giv[e] internal direction to facilitate performance of the legal services entailed in [the] representation" (Matter of Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskauer Rose Goetz Mendelsohn, 91 N.Y.2d 30, 37-38; cf., Getman v. Petro, 266 A.D.2d 688, 690).

Motion seeking leave to strike notice of appeal denied.

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.


Summaries of

Gamiel v. Sullivan Liapakis

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Dec 13, 2001
289 A.D.2d 88 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
Case details for

Gamiel v. Sullivan Liapakis

Case Details

Full title:RUCHAMA GAMIEL, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. SULLIVAN LIAPAKIS, P.C.…

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

Date published: Dec 13, 2001

Citations

289 A.D.2d 88 (N.Y. App. Div. 2001)
733 N.Y.S.2d 610

Citing Cases

Demartino v. Harleysville Worcester Ins. Co.

"The subject documents should be disclosed since they are material and necessary, and either contain matter…