Finding that a plaintiff café/bar failed to show that it was ever or would ever be profitable, a state appeals court has rejected a legal malpractice suit against a Manhattan law firm that had allegedly provided “erroneous’ insurance coverage advice while the bar was being sued for noise complaints.

In a terse opinion, the Appellate Division, First Department wrote that “because the calculation of plaintiff’s [VPC Projects, LLC’s] damages [linked to any legal malpractice] would rely on gross speculations about future events, namely, that the bar would have stayed open until such time as it became profitable and the profits matched plaintiff’s significant investment [of $1 million in the bar], plaintiff cannot prove that defendant’s malpractice, if any, proximately caused those damages.”

This content has been archived.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]