Hall Dickler Kent Goldstein & Wood v. Coleman

19 A.D.3d 169, 798 N.Y.S.2d 375, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6135
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedJune 9, 2005
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 19 A.D.3d 169 (Hall Dickler Kent Goldstein & Wood v. Coleman) 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
Hall Dickler Kent Goldstein & Wood v. Coleman, 19 A.D.3d 169, 798 N.Y.S.2d 375, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6135 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

[170]*170Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Nicholas Figueroa, J.), entered March 4, 2004, which awarded plaintiff law firm, after a jury trial, the principal sum of $200,172.05, for services rendered, and dismissed the remaining counterclaim, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeal from order, same court and Justice, entered on or about February 11, 2004, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.

The verdict was not irrational, and there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s reasoning and inferences (see Vasquez v Figueroa, 262 AD2d 179,180 [1999]). Defendant failed to meet his burden of showing that the counterclaim alleging malpractice was anything but a posttrial stratagem to shift the blame for his failure to advise his attorneys of his surreptitious withdrawals from his 401 (k) accounts. We reject the notion that even if the lawyer were negligent in failing to recognize the client-litigant’s deliberate deception, a cause of action for legal malpractice would lie. To the extent the issue was preserved, the interrogatories to the jury were not improper. Defendant’s request to direct a new trial in the interest of justice, due to the court’s purported bias, is without any basis in the record and is meritless. Concur-Mazzarelli, J.E, Saxe, Marlow and Sullivan, JJ.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
19 A.D.3d 169, 798 N.Y.S.2d 375, 2005 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6135, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hall-dickler-kent-goldstein-wood-v-coleman-nyappdiv-2005.