Legal Opinion

Fleissler v. Bayroff

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

Decided November 9, 1999PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Emily Goodman, J.), entered December 2, 1998, after a nonjury trial, in defendant’s favor dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiffs’ cause of action for legal malpractice was properly dismissed on the grounds that plaintiffs failed to establish the existence of an attorney-client relationship with defendant, a fellow investor, with respect to the real estate transaction at issue (see, Sucese v Kirsch, 199 AD2d 718) and, in any event, failed to establish that defendant’s conduct fell below the ordinary standard of practice…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Thaler & Thaler v. GuptaAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
  2. Sucese v. KirschAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1993
  3. Public Service Mutual Insurance v. HollanderAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1996

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Wei Cheng Chang v. PiAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
  2. Carruthers v. FlaumDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
  3. Shanley v. WelchAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2006
  4. Samide v. Roman Catholic DioceseNew York Supreme Court · 2003
  5. Weadick v. HerlihyAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API