Opinion
2014-04-24
Kevin WAILES, Plaintiff–Respondent, v. TEL NETWORKS USA, LLC, et al., Defendants–Appellants.
John H. Snyder PLLC, New York (Abaigeal L. Van Deerlin of counsel), for appellants. The Dweck Law Firm, LLP, New York (Jack S. Dweck of counsel), for respondent.
John H. Snyder PLLC, New York (Abaigeal L. Van Deerlin of counsel), for appellants.The Dweck Law Firm, LLP, New York (Jack S. Dweck of counsel), for respondent.
Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jeffrey K. Oing, J.), entered February 15, 2013, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendants' motion to dismiss the fourth cause of action as against defendant Snyder, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted.
The allegations of Snyder's conduct in his representation of defendant Tel Networks USA, LLC during settlement discussions with plaintiff, which plaintiff characterizes as “overzealous and intimidating,” do not state a cause of action under Judiciary Law § 487. The complaint alleges neither an intent to deceive nor “a chronic and extreme pattern of legal delinquency” that caused plaintiff a loss ( Kaminsky v. Herrick, Feinstein LLP, 59 A.D.3d 1, 13, 870 N.Y.S.2d 1 [1st Dept.2008] [internal quotation marks omitted], lv. denied12 N.Y.3d 715, 2009 WL 1810774 [2009];Nason v. Fisher, 36 A.D.3d 486, 487, 828 N.Y.S.2d 51 [1st Dept.2007] ). Moreover, the only allegations of wrongdoing refer to a settlement discussion had after Tel Networks commenced a legal proceeding, and that communication is absolutely privileged ( see Wiener v. Weintraub, 22 N.Y.2d 330, 292 N.Y.S.2d 667, 239 N.E.2d 540 [1968];Mosesson v. Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Firm, 257 A.D.2d 381, 382, 683 N.Y.S.2d 88 [1st Dept.1999], lv. denied 93 N.Y.2d 808, 691 N.Y.S.2d 382, 713 N.E.2d 417 [1999] ). SWEENY, J.P., ACOSTA, SAXE, MANZANET–DANIELS, CLARK, JJ., concur.