Learn About the Law
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
CLP LEASING COMPANY, LP, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Maurice N. NESSEN, et al., Defendants-Respondents.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Sherry Klein Heitler, J.), entered July 8, 2003, dismissing the complaint, and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered July 3, 2003, which granted defendants' CPLR 3211(a) motion, unanimously affirmed, without costs. Appeal from the aforesaid order unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.
In opposing defendants' prima facie showing that the limitations period in this legal malpractice action had expired, plaintiffs had the burden of demonstrating that the continuous representation doctrine applied, or at least that there was an issue of fact with respect thereto (see Minichello v. Northern Assur. Co. of Am., 304 A.D.2d 731, 758 N.Y.S.2d 669 [2003] ). But the documentation they submitted showed only the continuation of a general professional relationship, and not an ongoing representation concerning the specific matters from which their claims arose (see Parlato v. Equitable Life Assur. Socy., 299 A.D.2d 108, 749 N.Y.S.2d 216 [2002], lv. denied 99 N.Y.2d 508, 757 N.Y.S.2d 818, 787 N.E.2d 1164 [2003]; compare Shumsky v. Eisenstein, 96 N.Y.2d 164, 726 N.Y.S.2d 365, 750 N.E.2d 67 [2001] ). The insurance matter reflected in defendants' billing statements was unrelated to the litigation conduct that they criticized.
In view of the foregoing, it is unnecessary to address the other grounds now advanced for affirmance.
Thank you for your feedback!
As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.
Decided: November 16, 2004
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)
Harness the power of our directory with your own profile. Select the button below to sign up.
Learn more about FindLaw’s newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy.
Get help with your legal needs
FindLaw’s Learn About the Law features thousands of informational articles to help you understand your options. And if you’re ready to hire an attorney, find one in your area who can help.
Search our directory by legal issue
Enter information in one or both fields (Required)