From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kinberg v. Garr

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 6, 2006
28 A.D.3d 245 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)

Opinion

8242.

April 6, 2006.

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Alan J. Saks, J.), entered March 8, 2004, which granted defendants' motion for renewal and dismissed this legal malpractice action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Sara Kinberg, appellant pro se.

Ira E. Garr, New York, respondent pro se and for Ira E. Garr, P.C., respondent.

Before: Sullivan, J.P., Nardelli, Williams, Sweeny and McGuire, JJ.


Plaintiff's adverse determination in defendants' prior action to recover fees for the rendering of professional services precludes a finding of malpractice with regard to the same services ( see Ahearn v. Arvan, 2 AD3d 469; Chisholm-Ryder Co. v. Sommer Sommer, 78 AD2d 143), as such determination "implicitly finds that there was no malpractice" ( Koppelman v. Liddle, O'Connor, Finkelstein Robinson, 246 AD2d 365, 366).

We have considered plaintiff's remaining arguments and find them without merit.


Summaries of

Kinberg v. Garr

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 6, 2006
28 A.D.3d 245 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
Case details for

Kinberg v. Garr

Case Details

Full title:SARA KINBERG, Appellant, v. IRA E. GARR et al., Respondents

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

Date published: Apr 6, 2006

Citations

28 A.D.3d 245 (N.Y. App. Div. 2006)
2006 N.Y. Slip Op. 2634
811 N.Y.S.2d 568

Citing Cases

Zito v. Fischbein Badillo Wagner Harding

Indeed, during the prior appeal, plaintiff asked this Court to take judicial notice of the malpractice action…

Shutzman v. Ira Garr PC

In awarding defendant firm attorneys' fees for the entire remainder of defendant attorneys' representation of…