Search for: "McCoy v. Feinman"
Results 1 - 20
of 91
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
1 Oct 2018, 4:45 am
Feinman, 99 NY2d 295,301(2002). [read post]
30 Jul 2021, 5:08 am
“A legal malpractice claim accrues ‘when all the facts necessary to the cause of action have occurred and an injured party can obtain relief in court'” (McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 301, quoting Ackerman v Price Waterhouse, 84 NY2d 535, 541). [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]
15 Jul 2010, 3:25 am
Contrary to the plaintiffs' contention, they failed to establish that the statute of limitations was tolled by the continuous representation doctrine (see McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d at 306; cf. [read post]
17 Oct 2022, 3:00 am
McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d at 305; Stewart Tit. [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]
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]
10 Feb 2020, 4:36 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]
19 Feb 2019, 4:18 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]
21 Mar 2019, 4:12 am
Moreover, there was not a “mutual understanding of the need for further representation on the specific subject matter underlying the malpractice claim” (McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 306 [2002]). [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]
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]
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]
29 Sep 2021, 4:31 am
Unger v Horowitz, 8 AD3d 62, 62 [1st Dept 2004]; see generally McCoy, 99 NY2d at 306 [2002]). [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]
22 Mar 2018, 4:31 am
It is the McCoy v. [read post]
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]
21 Oct 2022, 6:20 am
Contrary to plaintiff’s contentions, the outstanding counterclaim in the employment action and defendants’ failure to move to be relieved in that action did not show a mutual understanding of a need for further representation (see McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 306 [2002]; Farina v Katsandonis, P.C., 197 AD3d 1033, 1033-34 [1st Dept 2021]; Hirsch v Fink, 89 AD3d 430, 431 [1st Dept 2011]). [read post]
22 Apr 2011, 1:58 am
As to legal malpractice, “A legal malpractice claim accrues ‘when all the facts necessary to the cause of action have occurred and an injured party can obtain relief in court”’ (McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 301 [2002] Here is the argument to be made when the statute might reasonably be argued: Sure, a mistake was made, but no claim could be made until the "but for" part of the case came into existence, and that did not come… [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]
