Opinion
570620/03.
Decided January 12, 2004.
Plaintiff appeals from a judgment of the Civil Court, New York County, entered on or about January 2, 2003 after a nonjury trial (Donna G. Recant, J.) in favor of defendant dismissing the complaint.
Judgment entered on or about January 2, 2003 (Donna G. Recant, J.) affirmed, with $25 costs.
PRESENT: HON. WILLIAM P. McCOOE, J.P., HON. WILLIAM J. DAVIS, HON. PHYLLIS GANGEL-JACOB, Justices.
The trial court properly dismissed plaintiff's legal malpractice action arising out of the underlying Washington, D.C., matrimonial litigation between plaintiff and her former husband. A fair interpretation of the evidence supports the court's finding that plaintiff failed to establish defendant's negligence and that but for the nature of her counsel's representation, she would have prevailed in the underlying action to obtain postdivorce vacatur relief (Andrews Beverage Distrib. v. Stern, 215 AD2d 706). Defendant's determination to prosecute the appeal of the dismissal of plaintiff's own divorce petition, and to forego a questionable lawsuit for fraud based upon plaintiff's dubious claim that her signature on a deed was a forgery, were tactical decisions which do not give rise to a cause of action for negligent representation. An attorney's selection of one of several reasonable courses of action does not constitute malpractice (Rosner v. Paley, 65 NY2d 736, 738).
Plaintiff's breach of contract cause of action was also properly dismissed, there being no claim that defendant made any express promise to obtain a specific result (Pacesetter Communications Corp. v. Solin Breindel, 150 AD2d 232, 236, lv dismissed 74 NY2d 892), and was "merely redundant of the inadequate legal malpractice claim" (Shonfeld v. Thompson, 243 AD2d 343, 344).
This constitutes the decision and order of the court.