Sienk v. Smolka

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sienk v. Smolka

142 A.D.2d 944, 530 N.Y.S.2d 1014, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14963

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided July 7, 1988·Published

Opinion

Order and judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: We agree with Special Term that plaintiff has failed to plead sufficient evidentiary facts to sustain an independent cause of action for fraud. The fraudu[945] lent concealment alleged in the complaint is an element of plaintiffs cause of action for legal malpractice (see, Simcuski v Saeli, 44 NY2d 442). (Appeal from order and judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Ricotta, J.-dismiss cause of action.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Balio, JJ., concur.

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

Order and judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: We agree with Special Term that plaintiff has failed to plead sufficient evidentiary facts to sustain an independent cause of action for fraud. The fraudu[945] lent concealment alleged in the complaint is an element of plaintiffs cause of action for legal malpractice (see, Simcuski v Saeli, 44 NY2d 442). (Appeal from order and judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Ricotta, J.-dismiss cause of action.) Present—Doerr, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Green and Balio, JJ., concur.

Sienk v. Smolka, 142 A.D.2d 944, 530 N.Y.S.2d 1014, 1988 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 14963 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

142 A.D.2d 944 (Sienk v. Smolka) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.