Search for: "McCoy v. Feinman"
Results 41 - 60
of 90
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
23 Apr 2018, 4:55 am
“Defendant established its entitlement to dismissal on statute of limitation grounds by submitting evidence that the malpractice occurred in 2008, but plaintiff did not commence this action until March 2016, well beyond the three-year limitation period for legal malpractice (CPLR 214[6]; see McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 301 [2002]; Ackerman v Price Waterhouse, 84 NY2d 535, 541 [1994]; Glamm v Allen, 57 NY2d 87, 93 [1982]). [read post]
22 Mar 2018, 4:31 am
It is the McCoy v. [read post]
19 Mar 2018, 4:40 am
More specifically, the continuous representation doctrine “applies only where there is ‘a mutual understanding of the need for further representation on the specific subject matter underlying the malpractice claim’ ” (Rodeo Family Enters., LLC v Matte, 99 AD3d at 784, quoting McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 306 [2002]). [read post]
16 Mar 2018, 4:06 am
What is important is when the malpractice was committed, not when the client discovered it” (McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 301, 755 NYS2d 693 [2002]). [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 4:15 am
In opposition, plaintiffs argue that the continuous representation doctrine applies to· Todtman Nachamie (McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 306 [2002]). [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 4:26 am
A legal malpractice claim accrues when relief can be obtained in court (McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 301 [2002]) and from the time the actual injury stemming from the malpractice occurs, not when it is discovered (Id.). [read post]
8 Dec 2017, 12:07 pm
Krantz, 175 A.D.2d 865 [2d Dept 1991], accord Sergeon v. [read post]
8 Dec 2017, 12:07 pm
Krantz, 175 A.D.2d 865 [2d Dept 1991], accord Sergeon v. [read post]
12 Oct 2017, 4:29 am
This is true even where the plaintiff is unaware of any malpractice, damages, or injury (McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d at 300- 301). [read post]
28 Sep 2017, 4:20 am
There was no evidence that the parties contemplated further representation of the defendant by the plaintiff after the entry of the judgment of divorce in the divorce action (see McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 306). [read post]
13 Sep 2012, 2:56 am
To recover damages for legal malpractice, a plaintiff is required to show that the defendant attorney failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession, and that the attorney's breach of this duty caused the plaintiff to suffer actual and ascertainable damages (see Dombrowski v Bulson, 19 NY3d 347, 350; Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442; McCoy v… [read post]
13 Jul 2012, 2:40 am
Spiegel v Rowland, 552 US 1257; see Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442; McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 301-302; Gioeli v Vlachos, 89 AD3d 984; Dempster v Liotti, 86 AD3d 169, 176). [read post]
5 Jul 2012, 2:51 am
That date was more than three years before the commencement of this action in June 2009 (see CPLR 214[6]; McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 301; Tsafatinos v Lee David Auerbach, P.C., 80 AD3d 749). [read post]
21 Jun 2012, 3:14 am
Plaintiff's legal malpractice claim accrued no earlier than when the agreement was executed, which occurred on November 29, 2002, the date of the last signature on the agreement (see McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295 [2002]), and this action was commenced less than three years later. [read post]
20 Jun 2012, 3:13 am
In a legal malpractice action, the claimant must show that an attorney "failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession" and that "the attorney s breach of this professional duty caused the (claimant' s) actual damages (McCoy Feinman 99 NY2d 295, 301-02 (2002)). [read post]
1 Jun 2012, 3:30 am
In order to recover damages in a legal malpractice action, a plaintiff must establish "that the attorney 'failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession' and that the attorney's breach of this duty proximately caused plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable damages" (Rudolf v Shayne, [*3]Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007], quoting McCoy v… [read post]
25 May 2012, 2:54 am
Further, contrary to the plaintiff's contention, the legal malpractice cause of action did not accrue at the time that the IRS conducted its audit in 2009. [*3]Therefore, the legal malpractice cause of action was not interposed within the applicable limitations period (see McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d at 301; Ackerman v Price Waterhouse, 84 NY2d 535, 541). [read post]
22 May 2012, 3:27 am
Gilbert 8 NY3d 933 934 (2007); McCoy v. [read post]
27 Apr 2012, 3:14 am
In a legal malpractice action, "a plaintiff must demonstrate that the attorney 'failed to exercise the ordinary reasonable skill and knowledge commonly possessed by a member of the legal profession' and that the attorney's breach of this duty proximately caused [the] plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable damages" (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007], quoting McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 301… [read post]
16 Apr 2012, 3:06 pm
The Court pointed out that in True v. [read post]
