Legal Opinion
Lavin & Kleiman v. J.M. Heinike Associates, Inc.
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
Decided November 15, 1995PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: County Court properly granted plaintiff summary judgment dismissing the counterclaim for legal malpractice. Plaintiff met its burden of establishing entitlement to judgment in its favor as a matter of law by the submission of evidentiary proof in admissible form. Defendant failed to produce evidentiary proof in admissible form "sufficient to require a trial of any issue of fact” (CPLR 3212 [b]). It is well settled that a cause of action for legal malpractice requires proof that the attorney "failed to exercise that degree of care, skill…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Billy v. Consolidated Machine Tool Corp.New York Court of Appeals · 1980
- Logalbo v. PlishkinAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1990
- John Grace & Co. v. Tunstead, Schechter & TorreAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1992
- L.I.C. Commercial Corp. v. RosenthalAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1994
3Cited by15 opinions
- Franklin v. Dormitory Authority of New YorkAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Mohamed v. Cellino & BarnesAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2002
- Yaeger v. UCC Constructors, Inc.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2001
- Lefkowitz v. LurieAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1998
- Williams v. KublickAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2003
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.