MII Exports, Inc. v. Mooney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

MII Exports, Inc. v. Mooney

223 A.D.2d 499, 637 N.Y.S.2d 95, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 727

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJanuary 30, 1996

StatusPublished

This text of 223 A.D.2d 499 (MII Exports, Inc. v. Mooney) 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

MII Exports, Inc. v. Mooney, 223 A.D.2d 499, 637 N.Y.S.2d 95, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 727 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.), entered November 1, 1994, dismissing the third-party complaint and bringing up for review the order of the same court and Justice entered August 16,1994, which granted third-party defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The third-party complaint was properly dismissed since it is clear that third-party defendants, substituted by plaintiffs as their attorneys in the underlying action in place of defendant attorney Donald Mooney, did not breach any duty owing to plaintiffs or contribute to the alleged legal malpractice which allegedly caused plaintiffs to sustain damages (see, Rosner v Paley, 65 NY2d 736). That third-party defendants moved to vacate, modify or reopen a prior summary judgment order in the underlying action instead of appealing that order, and that they negotiated a settlement upon the consent of their clients, plaintiffs herein, does not raise an issue of fact as to legal malpractice on the part of third-party defendants (see, supra, at 738; see also, Kramer v Belfi, 106 AD2d 615; Soliman v Ebasco Servs., 822 F2d 320, 323 [2d Cir 1987], cert denied 484 US 1020).

We have considered third-party plaintiff’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli, Williams and Tom, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Lobis, J.), entered November 1, 1994, dismissing the third-party complaint and bringing up for review the order of the same court and Justice entered August 16,1994, which granted third-party defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The third-party complaint was properly dismissed since it is clear that third-party defendants, substituted by plaintiffs as their attorneys in the underlying action in place of defendant attorney Donald Mooney, did not breach any duty owing to plaintiffs or contribute to the alleged legal malpractice which allegedly caused plaintiffs to sustain damages (see, Rosner v Paley, 65 NY2d 736). That third-party defendants moved to vacate, modify or reopen a prior summary judgment order in the underlying action instead of appealing that order, and that they negotiated a settlement upon the consent of their clients, plaintiffs herein, does not raise an issue of fact as to legal malpractice on the part of third-party defendants (see, supra, at 738; see also, Kramer v Belfi, 106 AD2d 615; Soliman v Ebasco Servs., 822 F2d 320, 323 [2d Cir 1987], cert denied 484 US 1020).

We have considered third-party plaintiff’s other contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Nardelli, Williams and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

223 A.D.2d 499, 637 N.Y.S.2d 95, 1996 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 727, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mii-exports-inc-v-mooney-nyappdiv-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack