Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskauer Rose, L. L. P.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskauer Rose, L. L. P.

284 A.D.2d 239, 726 N.Y.S.2d 555, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6562

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

DecidedJune 21, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 284 A.D.2d 239 (Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskauer Rose, L. L. P.) 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

Sage Realty Corp. v. Proskauer Rose, L. L. P., 284 A.D.2d 239, 726 N.Y.S.2d 555, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6562 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered February 8, 2001, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

In their remaining cause of action for legal malpractice, plaintiffs allege that defendant represented them while laboring under a conflict of interest. Plaintiffs have, however, failed to offer any proof of damages attributable to the alleged malpractice independent of their claim previously dismissed by reason of their bad faith destruction of evidence (see, Sage Realty Corp. v Proskauer Rose, 275 AD2d 11, 12). Accordingly, [240]*240the motion court properly dismissed the complaint since plaintiffs were unable to establish a prima facie cause of action for legal malpractice (see, Estate of Nevelson v Carro, Spanbock, Kaster & Cuiffo, 259 AD2d 282, 283). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Tom, Andrias and Marlow, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.), entered February 8, 2001, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

In their remaining cause of action for legal malpractice, plaintiffs allege that defendant represented them while laboring under a conflict of interest. Plaintiffs have, however, failed to offer any proof of damages attributable to the alleged malpractice independent of their claim previously dismissed by reason of their bad faith destruction of evidence (see, Sage Realty Corp. v Proskauer Rose, 275 AD2d 11, 12). Accordingly, [240]*240the motion court properly dismissed the complaint since plaintiffs were unable to establish a prima facie cause of action for legal malpractice (see, Estate of Nevelson v Carro, Spanbock, Kaster & Cuiffo, 259 AD2d 282, 283). Concur — Rosenberger, J. P., Williams, Tom, Andrias and Marlow, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 A.D.2d 239, 726 N.Y.S.2d 555, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6562, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sage-realty-corp-v-proskauer-rose-l-l-p-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack