Justice Doris Ling-Cohan
Dash sued defendants, law firm Davis & Gilbert LLP, and her late father’s wife, for monetary damages for alleged legal malpractice and fraud in decedent’s estate proceedings. Defendants jointly moved to dismiss the complaint arguing Dash’s claims were barred by res judicata. Dash previously filed objections in the Surrogate’s Court action, and reached a settlement with the executors. Defendants argued Dash sought to re-litigate issues that were settled in the surrogate’s court action, thus her claims were barred by res judicata. Dash contended she was not previously given a full and fair opportunity to litigate her claims in the surrogate’s court proceeding. The court disagreed finding Dash received and reviewed a final accounting before entering into the stipulation in which she chose to settle the prior action and withdraw her objections with prejudice. It stated Dash failed to allege how her claims, arising from the same transaction, were not, or could not have been addressed in the surrogate’s court action. Thus, the court ruled Dash could not raise the same claims, previously brought to a final conclusion in a prior suit, concluding they were barred by res judicata. Hence, it granted defendants dismissal.
