Volpe v. Drelich

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Volpe v. Drelich

266 A.D.2d 70, 698 N.Y.S.2d 463, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11629

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

DecidedNovember 16, 1999

StatusPublished

This text of 266 A.D.2d 70 (Volpe v. Drelich) 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

Volpe v. Drelich, 266 A.D.2d 70, 698 N.Y.S.2d 463, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11629 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered on or about December 9, 1998, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this legal malpractice action, factual issues exist as to whether “but for” the law firm’s negligence, plaintiff would have prevailed in the underlying action (see, Pacesetter Communications Corp. v Solin & Breindel, 150 AD2d 232, 233, lv dismissed 74 NY2d 892). Plaintiffs account of her accident and the surrounding circumstances raised factual issues as to the landowner’s liability that were sufficient to preclude summary judgment on her malpractice claim. Concur — Williams, J. P., Rubin, Saxe and Friedman, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Alice Schlesinger, J.), entered on or about December 9, 1998, which, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant-appellant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In this legal malpractice action, factual issues exist as to whether “but for” the law firm’s negligence, plaintiff would have prevailed in the underlying action (see, Pacesetter Communications Corp. v Solin & Breindel, 150 AD2d 232, 233, lv dismissed 74 NY2d 892). Plaintiffs account of her accident and the surrounding circumstances raised factual issues as to the landowner’s liability that were sufficient to preclude summary judgment on her malpractice claim. Concur — Williams, J. P., Rubin, Saxe and Friedman, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

266 A.D.2d 70, 698 N.Y.S.2d 463, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11629, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/volpe-v-drelich-nyappdiv-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack