Citing collateral estoppel where a law firm client’s underlying fraud claim was ruled to be without merit, an appeals court has tossed out the client’s malpractice action against the firm despite a lower court ruling that the firm’s named partner and the client’s previous counsel had demonstrated “egregious lack of diligence” by not timely serving a summons with the underlying complaint.

An Appellate Division, First Department panel has ruled that the legal malpractice lawsuit launched by plaintiff Ricky Zegelstein, a Nassau County-based anesthesiologist, against her former attorney, Richard Roth, and his boutique firm, must be dismissed because a federal judge decided that her underlying fraud action levied against other physicians over medical-care billing had failed to state a claim.

This content has been archived.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]