SUPERIOR TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, INC. plf-ap, v. DAVID ROZENHOLC, def-res — Solomon Zabrowsky, New York, for ap

3075. SUPERIOR TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS, INC. plf-ap, v. DAVID ROZENHOLC, def-res — Solomon Zabrowsky, New York, for ap — Furman Kornfeld & Brennan LLP, New York (Bain R. Loucks of counsel), for res — Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan A. Madden, J.), entered October 7, 2015, which granted defendant David Rozhenholc’s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint against him for attorney malpractice, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant has established that the malpractice claim fails for multiple reasons, and plaintiffs have failed to raise any triable issues (Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 NY2d 557, 562 [1980]; Sabalza v. Salgado, 85 AD3d 436, 437 [1st Dept 2011]). There is no support for plaintiffs’ contention that defendant had a duty to renew the lease on their behalf, or to advise them of the need to do so (see Kaminsky v. Herrick, Feinstein LLP, 59 AD3d 1, 9 [1st Dept 2008], lv denied 12 NY3d 715 [2009]). The record demonstrates that defendant’s representation was limited to litigating and negotiating a settlement with respect to the Yellowstone action, which defendant brought on plaintiffs’ behalf, and that the scope of his services was not transactional. Defendant was not actively representing plaintiffs at the time the lease was negotiated or when the renewal option was to be exercised.