Home/Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York/Evart v. Shapiro, Beilly & Aronowitz, LLP

Evart v. Shapiro, Beilly & Aronowitz, LLP

127 A.D.3d 409, 4 N.Y.S.3d 502
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedApril 2, 2015
Docket14698 307387/12
StatusPublished

This text of 127 A.D.3d 409 (Evart v. Shapiro, Beilly & Aronowitz, LLP) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Evart v. Shapiro, Beilly & Aronowitz, LLP, 127 A.D.3d 409, 4 N.Y.S.3d 502 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J.), entered on or about July 2, 2013, which granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The motion court properly dismissed plaintiffs legal malpractice claims, since this Court previously dismissed the informed consent claims in the underlying action for lack of causation (Evart v Park Ave. Chiropractic, P.C., 86 AD3d 442 [2011], lv denied 17 NY3d 922 [2011]). Accordingly, plaintiff cannot establish that she would have succeeded on the merits of her underlying informed consent claims “but for” defendants’ negligence (see AmBase Corp. v Davis Polk & Wardwell, 8 NY3d 428, 434 [2007]).

Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Sweeny, DeGrasse, Feinman and Gische, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

AmBase Corp. v. Davis Polk & Wardwell
866 N.E.2d 1033 (New York Court of Appeals, 2007)
Evart v. Park Avenue Chiropractic, P.C.
86 A.D.3d 442 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
127 A.D.3d 409, 4 N.Y.S.3d 502, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/evart-v-shapiro-beilly-aronowitz-llp-nyappdiv-2015.