Gotay v. Breitbart

New York Court of Appeals

Gotay v. Breitbart

912 N.E.2d 1056, 12 N.Y.3d 894

New York Court of Appeals·Decided June 25, 2009·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed, with costs, motions for summary judgment by defendants-appellants granted and certified question answered in the negative. Plaintiffs legal malpractice claim was not brought within the applicable statute of limitations period, and defendants-appellants established as a matter of law that the continuous representation doctrine does not apply.

Concur: Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones. Taking no part: Chief Judge Lippman.

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

OPINION OF THE COURT

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order reversed, with costs, motions for summary judgment by defendants-appellants granted and certified question answered in the negative. Plaintiffs legal malpractice claim was not brought within the applicable statute of limitations period, and defendants-appellants established as a matter of law that the continuous representation doctrine does not apply.

Concur: Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones. Taking no part: Chief Judge Lippman.

Gotay v. Breitbart, 912 N.E.2d 1056, 12 N.Y.3d 894 (N.Y. 2009).

Pincite

912 N.E.2d 1056 (Gotay v. Breitbart) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related