A real estate development company’s legal malpractice claim against a Manhattan law firm cannot survive because the company’s responsive papers to a dismissal motion lacked evidentiary detail, an Appellate Division, First Department panel has ruled.

Any factual question raised goes only to one element of a malpractice claim, proximate causation, and it’s clear that the development company caused its own damages, the panel wrote.

This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.

To view this content, please continue to their sites.

Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]