From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Marquez v. J. Ross Development

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 22, 1990
162 A.D.2d 1011 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

June 22, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Monroe County, Wesley, J.

Present — Doerr, J.P., Denman, Balio, Lawton and Lowery, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted summary judgment dismissing plaintiffs' legal malpractice claims based upon negligent representation and conflict of interest against defendant attorney. To establish a prima facie case of legal malpractice, a client must demonstrate that his attorney failed to exercise that degree of skill commonly exercised by an ordinary member of the legal community, and that the client incurred damages as a direct result of the attorney's actions (see, Saveca v. Reilly, 111 A.D.2d 493, 494; O'Brien v. Spuck, 99 A.D.2d 910, 911). Contrasted to a disqualification proceeding, where only the possibility of prejudice need be shown (see, Forbush v. Forbush, 107 A.D.2d 375, 379-381), in a legal malpractice action, the client must demonstrate that a conflict existed and that he was damaged thereby. "[T]he issue of proximate cause cannot be left to speculation" (1 Mallen Smith, Legal Malpractice § 12.17, at 746 [3d ed]). Here, plaintiffs failed to demonstrate that the damages they incurred were the result of actions taken by defendant attorney; consequently, their claims were properly dismissed.


Summaries of

Marquez v. J. Ross Development

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jun 22, 1990
162 A.D.2d 1011 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Marquez v. J. Ross Development

Case Details

Full title:ROBERT L. MARQUEZ et al., Appellants, v. J. ROSS DEVELOPMENT et al.…

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

Date published: Jun 22, 1990

Citations

162 A.D.2d 1011 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
557 N.Y.S.2d 802

Citing Cases

Shanley v. Welch

ction on the ground that it fails to state a cause of action ( see CPLR 3211). A motion to dismiss for…

Oot v. Arno

We conclude that defendants submitted evidence in admissible form establishing that plaintiffs are unable to…