Search for: "Molinoff v Tanenbaum"
Results 1 - 1
of 1
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
7 Jul 2021, 3:03 am
Contrary to Drexel’s contention, the plaintiff’s claim that Drexel overbilled and charged him for unnecessary legal services is distinct from a legal malpractice cause of action, as the plaintiff’s claim does not challenge the quality of Drexel’s work (see Ullmann-Schneider v Lacher & Lovell-Taylor, P.C., 121 AD3d at 416; Tanenbaum v Molinoff, 118 AD3d 774, 775-776). [read post]
