The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 005) 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 113, 114, 117 were read on this motion to/for DISMISS. The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 006) 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 96, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 115 were read on this motion to/for DISMISSAL. The following e-filed documents, listed by NYSCEF document number (Motion 007) 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 97, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 116, 118, 119, 120, 121 were read on this motion to/for DISMISSAL. DECISION AND ORDER Motion sequence nos. 005, 006 and 007 are consolidated for disposition. This action arises out defendants’ representation of plaintiff Beth Coplan Kaufman in a contested matrimonial action against nonparty Thomas Kaufman (Thomas) captioned Kaufman v. Kaufman, Sup Ct, Westchester County, Index No. 4815/2012 (the Divorce Proceeding) (NY St Cts Elec Filing [NYSCEF] Doc No. 66, A. Michael Furman [Furman] affirmation, exhibit A, 11). In motion sequence no. 005, defendants Bender & Kaplan, P.C. (B&K), Dina Kaplan (Kaplan), and Joel C. Bender, Esq. P.C. (Bender) (collectively, Bender/Kaplan), move, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1) and (7), for dismissal of the complaint. In motion sequence no. 006, defendants Bender & Rosenthal, LLP (B&R) and Bender Rosenthal Isaacs & Richter LLP (BRIR LLP) (together, BRIR) move, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (5) and (7), for dismissal of the complaint. In motion sequence no. 007, defendant Boies Schiller Flexner LLP (BSF) moves, pursuant to CPLR 3211 (a) (1), (5) and (7) for an order dismissing the complaint against it, or in the alternative, for an order, pursuant to CPLR 7503 (a), staying the present action and compelling plaintiff to arbitrate her claims against it. FACTUAL BACKGROUND According to the complaint, plaintiff executed a retainer agreement dated May 14, 2012 with BSF in relation to the Divorce Proceeding (the BSF Retainer) (NYSCEF Doc No. 66, 13). A clause in the agreement states that, except for a dispute over BSF’s fees, arbitration was the sole method by which the parties would resolve a dispute between them (NYSCEF Doc No. 89, Marilyn C. Kunstler [Kunstler] affirmation, exhibit B at 1). BSF allegedly advised plaintiff to retain counsel familiar with the practice of matrimonial law in Westchester County (NYSCEF Doc No. 66, 14). Upon BSF’s recommendation, plaintiff executed a separate retainer agreement dated May 21, 2012 with BRIR LLP (the BRIR Retainer) (id., 15). According to the BRIR Retainer, Bender was an of counsel to the firm (NYSCEF Doc No. 81, Matthew K. Flanagan [Flanagan] affirmation, exhibit E at 1). Kaplan was an associate to Bender (id. at 3; NYSCEF Doc No. 65, Kaplan aff, 6). B&R is the successor firm to BRIR LLP (NYSCEF Doc No. 82, Flanagan affirmation, exhibit F at 2). In 2014, the entity known as “Joel C. Bender, Esq., P.C.” changed its name to “Bender & Kaplan, P.C.,” and remained known as B&K until 2017, when its name reverted back to “Joel C. Bender, Esq., P.C.” (id. at 4). Plaintiff complains that “[d]efendants committed various acts of overbilling, legal malpractice, and violated Judiciary Law section 487″ in connection with their representation of her in the Divorce Proceeding (NYSCEF Doc No. 66, 12). First, it is alleged that “Kaplan committed malpractice almost immediately” by agreeing in a preliminary conference stipulation that “jewelry; art work; cars; personal property” were Thomas’s separate property, thereby blocking her “efforts to obtain a proper equitable distribution of marital assets” (NYSCEF Doc No. 66,
18-19). Next, defendants allegedly overbilled plaintiff for their services. A report prepared by Timothy Brennan, one of Thomas’s experts in the Divorce Proceeding, found that: (1) the BSF Retainer did not comply with 22 NYCRR 1400.3; (2) BSF aided and abetted the unauthorized practice of law by permitting Theodore Uno (Uno), a Florida attorney who was not licensed in New York, to work on the matter; and (3) BSF’s legal fees and travel expenses were improper, unreasonable, unnecessary or excessive (NYSCEF Doc No. 66, 22). BSF billed $484,620 for Uno’s services (id., 28) and $154,043.03 in travel and lodging expenses (id., 31). In addition to Uno, BSF permitted James Fox Miller (Miller), another Florida attorney who is not licensed in this state, and David A. Barrett (Barrett), a New York attorney without expertise in family law, to work on the matter (id.,
