Search for: "Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C."
Results 1 - 20
of 24
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Jun 2023, 3:43 am
Floral Park Ophthalmology, P.C. v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, LLP 2023 NY Slip Op 2863Decided on May 31, 2023 Appellate Division, Second Department shows how the courts take a deep dive into attorney defenses to legal malpractice claims. [read post]
14 Mar 2018, 10:33 pm
RUSKIN MOSCOU FALTISCHEK, P.C., Appellant. 2015-06404, Index No. 606457/14., 2018 NY Slip Op 01456, was recently decided by the New York Appellate Division. [read post]
26 Aug 2019, 6:23 am
Gobindram v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 2019 NY Slip Op 06190 Decided on August 21, 2019 Appellate Division, Second Department stand for the proposition that when an attorney has a second chance to correct mistakes and fails to do so, a claim for legal malpractice may be good. [read post]
22 Oct 2012, 3:10 am
., P.C. v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C. ; 2011 NY Slip Op 50801(U) ; ; Supreme Court, Suffolk County ; Pines, J. is a prime example. [read post]
22 Aug 2012, 2:53 am
., P.C. v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C. ; 2011 NY Slip Op 50801(U) ; ; Supreme Court, Suffolk County ; Pines, J. is a prime example. [read post]
8 Jan 2020, 4:42 am
“A cause of action to recover damages for legal malpractice accrues when the malpractice is committed, not when it is discovered” (Alizio v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 126 AD3d at 735; see McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d at 301; Quinn v McCabe, Collins, McGeough & Fowler, LLP, 138 AD3d at 1086; Farage v Ehrenberg, 124 AD3d at 164; Landow v Snow Becker Krauss, P.C., 111 AD3d at 796). [read post]
10 Feb 2020, 4:36 am
Young, P.C., 121 AD3d 969, 969 [2014]; see Alizio v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 126 AD3d 733, 734-735 [2015]; Landow v Snow Becker Krauss, P.C., 111 AD3d 795, 796 [2013]). [read post]
19 Feb 2019, 4:18 am
Young, P.C., 121 AD3d 969, 969; see Alizio v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 126 AD3d 733, 734-735; Landow v Snow Becker Krauss, P.C., 111 AD3d 795, 796). [read post]
10 Jul 2018, 4:07 am
Since the plaintiff did not commence this action until February 27, 2015, more than three years later, Figueredo demonstrated, prima facie, that the legal malpractice cause of action was time-barred (see Quinn v McCabe, Collins, McGeough & Fowler, LLP, 138 AD3d at 1086; Alizio v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 126 AD3d at 735; Landow v Snow Becker Krauss, P.C., 111 AD3d at 796). [read post]
3 Sep 2019, 4:39 am
“To establish causation, a plaintiff must show that he or she would have prevailed in the underlying action or would not have incurred any damages, but for the lawyer’s negligence” (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d at 442; see Garcia v Polsky, Shouldice & Rosen, P.C., 161 AD3d 828, 830 [2018]; Kliger-Weiss Infosystems, Inc. v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 159 AD3d 683, 684 [2018]). [read post]
2 Aug 2019, 4:05 am
Inc. v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek. [read post]
25 Oct 2018, 4:12 am
The statute of limitations for causes of action alleging legal malpractice is three years (see CPLR 214[6]; Alizio v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 126 AD3d 733, 735). [read post]
8 Mar 2018, 4:02 am
Kliger-Weiss Infosystems, Inc. v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C. [read post]
30 Mar 2018, 4:05 am
“The statute of limitations for the cause of action alleging legal malpractice is three years (see CPLR 214 [6]; Alizio v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 126 AD3d 733, 735 [2015]). [read post]
24 May 2012, 2:35 am
. [*2]" Now, in a second try, they sue Ruskin Moscou Faltischek P.C. 2012 NY Slip Op 03954 Decided on May 22, 2012 Appellate Division, First Department . [read post]
23 Jan 2019, 3:58 am
” “The statute of limitations for causes of action alleging legal malpractice is three years (see CPLR 214 [6]; Alizio v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 126 AD3d 733, 735 [2015]). [read post]
3 Jan 2022, 5:28 am
Contrary to the defendants’ contention, at this preliminary stage of the litigation, they failed to conclusively demonstrate that the plaintiffs’ subsequent attorney had a sufficient opportunity to correct the defendants’ alleged negligence, such that they did not proximately cause any damages flowing from that negligence (see Gobindram v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 175 AD3d 586, 591). [read post]
15 May 2023, 4:26 am
The doctrine of collateral estoppel “precludes a party from relitigating in a subsequent action or proceeding an issue raised in a prior action or proceeding and decided against that party, whether or not the tribunals or causes of action are the same” (Gobindram v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 175 AD3d 586, 589; see Buechel v Bain, 97 NY2d 295, 303). [read post]
26 Feb 2019, 4:23 am
“To establish causation, a plaintiff must show that he or she would have prevailed in the underlying action or would not have incurred any damages, but for the lawyer’s negligence” (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d at 442; see Garcia v Polsky, Shouldice & Rosen, P.C., 161 AD3d 828, 830; Kliger-Weiss Infosystems, Inc. v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 159 AD3d 683, 684). [read post]
2 Aug 2021, 3:08 am
“On a defendant’s motion to dismiss the complaint based upon the plaintiff’s alleged lack of standing, the burden is on the moving defendant to establish, prima facie, the plaintiff’s lack of standing” (BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP v Rychik, 161 AD3d 924, 925; see CPLR 3211[a][3]; Gobindram v Ruskin Moscou Faltischek, P.C., 175 AD3d 586, 591). [read post]
