Coleman v. Korn
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
1Opinion of the Court
Plaintiff was required to commence this legal malpractice action within three years of defendant’s withdrawal as his counsel, but failed to do so (see CPLR 214 [6]; cf. Gonzalez v Ellenberg, 300 AD2d 173, 174 [2002]). Plaintiff’s fraud and Judiciary Law § 487 claims were raised for the first time in a surreply, which Supreme Court properly refused to consider (see CPLR 2214 [b], [c]; Garced v Clinton Arms Assoc., 58 AD3d 506, 509 [2009]).
We have considered plaintiffs remaining contentions and find them unavailing. Concur — Tom, J.P., Friedman, Sweeny, Moskowitz and DeGrasse, JJ.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Garced v. Clinton Arms AssociatesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2009
- Gonzalez v. EllenbergAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
3Cited by4 opinions
- 449 W. 37 Realty LLC v. HermanAppellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York · 2019
- Mehmeti v. KarlinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2024
- Queens Unit Venture v. Tyson Court Owners Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013
- Queens Unit Venture v. Tyson Court Owners Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2013