On April 12, 2018, the First Department issued a decision in Davis v. Cohen & Gresser, LLP, 2018 NY Slip Op. 02542, affirming the dismissal of a legal malpractice claim as time-barred because the continuous representation doctrine does not apply to representations unrelated to the malpractice claim, explaining: Davis cannot rely on the continuous representation… Read more »
Blogs
Posts Categorized: Law Firms and Professional Ethics
Counsel Disqualified Because of Representation in Prior Related Action
On March 1, 2018, Justice Ash of the Kings County Commercial Division issued a decision in Dollinger v. Landa, 2018 NY Slip Op. 30365(U), disqualifying counsel because of a conflict based on a representation in a prior related action, explaining: A party seeking disqualification of its adversary’s counsel based on counsel’s purported prior representation of… Read more »
Court Refuses to Disqualify Counsel Based on Lawyer-Witness Rule
On February 1, 2018, Justice Ash of the Kings County Commercial Division issued a decision in Atlantic Yards Plaza LLC v. Talde, 2018 NY Slip Op. 30179(U), refusing to disqualify a lawyer under the lawyer-witness rule, explaining: [D]isqualification of MSF is also unwarranted pursuant to the witness-advocate rule. The witness-advocate rule contained in the Rules… Read more »
Corporation’s Former Counsel Cannot Represent One Shareholder Against Others
On February 7, 2018, the Second Department issued a decision in Deerin v. Ocean Rich Foods, LLC, 2018 NY Slip Op. 00820, holding that counsel should have been disqualified due to a conflict, explaining: A party seeking disqualification of its adversary’s counsel based on counsel’s purported prior representation of that party must establish (1) the… Read more »
Fiduciary Duty Claim Against Former Counsel Based on Conflict Timely Even Though Malpractice Claim Untimely
On December 28, 2017, the First Department issued a decision in Palmeri v. Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP, 2017 NY Slip Op. 09252, holding that a breach of fiduciary duty claim against former counsel was timely based on a conflict even though the related malpractice claim was untimely, explaining: Plaintiff’s claim for legal malpractice, in… Read more »
Prior Representation Not Shown to be Substantially Related so as to Justify Attorney Disqualification
On December 21, 2017, the Third Department issued a decision in NYAHSA Services, Inc., Self-insurance Trust v. People Care Inc., 2017 NY Slip Op. 08930, holding that a prior representation was not so substantially related to a current dispute in which prior counsel was adverse so as to justify that counsel’s disqualification, explaining: A party… Read more »
Court Denies Motion to Disqualify Counsel Because Prior Representation Was Not Substantially Related to Present One
On November 21, 2017, Justice Sherwood of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in Capital One Equip. Fin. Corp. v. Harari, 2017 NY Slip Op. 32460(U), denying a motion to disqualify counsel because their previous representation was not substantially related to the present one, explaining: Defendants ask that the issue of disqualification be… Read more »
Mere Error in Judgment Cannot Be Basis for Malpractice Claim
On November 14, 2017, the First Department issued a decision in Smith, Gambrell & Russell, LLP v. Telecommunications Systems Inc., 2017 NY Slip Op. 07954, holding that a mere error in judgment cannot be the basis for a legal malpractice claim, explaining: On appeal, defendant argues that plaintiff’s filing of a sanctions motion, instead of… Read more »
Representation of Business Owners Not Representation of Business for Conflict Purposes
On October 23, 2017, Justice Bransten of the New York County Commercial Division issued a decision in MVP Delivery & Logistics, Inc. v. American International Group, 2017 NY Slip Op. 32280(U), holding that a prior representation of a business’s owners was not a representation of the business for conflicts purposes, explaining: A party seeking disqualification… Read more »
Action Dismissed Because Plaintiff’s Counsel Did Not Maintain Office in New York
On October 17, 2017, the First Department issued a decision in Arrowhead Capital Finance, Ltd. v. Cheyne Specialty Finance Fund L.P., 2017 NY Slip Op 07219, affirming the dismissal of an action because plaintiff’s counsel did not maintain an office in New York state in violation of Judiciary Law Section 470, explaining: The record supports… Read more »