An action for legal malpractice arose out of an underlying mortgage foreclosure proceeding. Plaintiff’s complaint alleged that the law firm defendant failed to oppose a motion for summary judgment in the underlying action and that, but for that failure, plaintiff would have been successful and prevailed in the action.
Staten Island Supreme Court Justice Ronald Castorina Jr. noted that in doing so, however, the complaint made only a single vague allegation to support the claim that plaintiff would have prevailed in the underlying action.
This content has been archived.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
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]
