Simons v. Greenberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Simons v. Greenberg

299 A.D.2d 265, 749 N.Y.S.2d 715, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11274

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

DecidedNovember 21, 2002

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 299 A.D.2d 265 (Simons v. Greenberg) 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

Simons v. Greenberg, 299 A.D.2d 265, 749 N.Y.S.2d 715, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11274 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered on or about September 24, 2001, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Summary judgment dismissing the complaint in this action for legal malpractice was proper. The record discloses no triable issue as to whether defendant, in connection with his representation of plaintiff as a party to a real estate transaction, failed to exercise the degree of skill commonly exercised by an ordinary member of the legal community, much less as to whether any such departure by defendant caused the delay in closing to which plaintiff attributes his economic harm (see McKenna v Forsyth & Forsyth, 280 AD2d 79, 80, lv denied 96 NY2d 720). Concur — Saxe, J.P., Buckley, Rosenberger, Lerner and Gonzalez, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Edward Lehner, J.), entered on or about September 24, 2001, which granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Summary judgment dismissing the complaint in this action for legal malpractice was proper. The record discloses no triable issue as to whether defendant, in connection with his representation of plaintiff as a party to a real estate transaction, failed to exercise the degree of skill commonly exercised by an ordinary member of the legal community, much less as to whether any such departure by defendant caused the delay in closing to which plaintiff attributes his economic harm (see McKenna v Forsyth & Forsyth, 280 AD2d 79, 80, lv denied 96 NY2d 720). Concur — Saxe, J.P., Buckley, Rosenberger, Lerner and Gonzalez, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

299 A.D.2d 265, 749 N.Y.S.2d 715, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11274, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simons-v-greenberg-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack