Opinion
January 30, 1996
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.).
The third-party complaint was properly dismissed since it is clear that third-party defendants, substituted by plaintiffs as their attorneys in the underlying action in place of defendant attorney Donald Mooney, did not breach any duty owing to plaintiffs or contribute to the alleged legal malpractice which allegedly caused plaintiffs to sustain damages ( see, Rosner v Paley, 65 N.Y.2d 736). That third-party defendants moved to vacate, modify or reopen a prior summary judgment order in the underlying action instead of appealing that order, and that they negotiated a settlement upon the consent of their clients, plaintiffs herein, does not raise an issue of fact as to legal malpractice on the part of third-party defendants ( see, supra, at 738; see also, Kramer v Belfi, 106 A.D.2d 615; Soliman v Ebasco Servs., 822 F.2d 320, 323 [2d Cir 1987], cert denied 484 U.S. 1020).
We have considered third-party plaintiff's other contentions and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Rosenberger, J.P., Wallach, Nardelli, Williams and Tom, JJ.