Legal Opinion
Swift v. Ki Young Choe
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided June 4, 1998PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT
Saxe, J.
Where two clients with potentially competing interests agree to have the same attorney represent them, and ratify this dual representation by a written acknowledgment and release, are claims of attorney malpractice necessarily foreclosed? We hold that they are not.
The essential facts are as follows: until December 20, 1991, plaintiff J. David Swift (David) was nominally the owner of properties located at 130 South Second Street and 342 Bedford *190Avenue, in Brooklyn. However, his uncle, Carl Swift (Carl), who had originally owned the properties and deeded them to…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gross v. SweetNew York Court of Appeals · 1979
- Greene v. GreeneNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
- Whitehead v. . KennedyNew York Court of Appeals · 1877
- Mergler v. Crystal Properties Associates, Ltd.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- Brainard v. BrownAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1983
3Cited by15 opinions
- William Kaufman Organization, Ltd. v. Graham & James L. L. P.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2000
- Schwartz v. Olshan Grundman Frome & RosenzweigAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Talansky v. SchulmanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
- Ulico Casualty Co. v. WilsonAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2008
- David v. HackAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2012
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.