Search for: "McCoy v. Feinman"
Results 81 - 90
of 90
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
27 Jan 2010, 3:09 am
Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438 (2007), quoting McCoy v. [read post]
20 Jan 2010, 3:25 am
The parties must have a "mutual understanding" that further representation is needed with respect to the matter underlying the malpractice claim (McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d at 306). [read post]
24 Dec 2009, 3:40 am
See McCoy v. [read post]
2 Sep 2009, 4:35 am
To establish a claim to recover damages for legal malpractice, "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 plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable damages" (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442 [2007], quoting McCoy… [read post]
14 Jul 2009, 5:08 am
"To sustain a cause of action alleging legal malpractice, 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 the plaintiff actual and ascertainable damages (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442, quoting McCoy v… [read post]
13 Apr 2009, 4:29 am
At the trial level one must prove the usual :"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 plaintiff to sustain actual and ascertainable damages" (Rudolf v Shayne, Dachs, Stanisci, Corker & Sauer, 8 NY3d 438, 442, quoting McCoy v… [read post]
17 Dec 2008, 3:41 am
Since the cause of action accrued no later than May 2002 and was not interposed until June 2007, it was time-barred (see McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 301; Glamm v Allen, 57 NY2d 87, 93). [read post]
1 May 2008, 4:44 am
In support of their respective motions pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(5), each of the defendants demonstrated, prima facie, that the time in which to sue had expired and that the complaint was time-barred as against them (see McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 785 N.E.2d 714, 755 N.Y.S.2d 693; Sabadie v Burke, 47 AD3d 913, 849 N.Y.S.2d 440; Matter of Schwartz, 44 AD3d 779, 843 N.Y.S.2d 403; Savarese v Shatz, 273 AD2d 219, 708 N.Y.S.2d 642; CPLR 214[6]). [read post]
20 Mar 2008, 3:08 am
"The cause of action to recover damages for legal malpractice accrued when the defendant allegedly failed to advise the plaintiff of her equitable distribution rights and failed to disclose a conflict of interest (see Venturella-Ferretti v Kinzler, 306 AD2d 465, 466; see also Zorn v Gilbert, 8 NY3d 933, 934; McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 305). [read post]
21 Dec 2007, 3:18 am
" Here, the earliest ascertainable date that the plaintiffs' legal malpractice cause of action existed is December 21, 1992, the date that the agreement was entered into (see McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295; Town of Wallkill v Rosenstein, 40 AD3d 972). [read post]
