WATSON v. RHEINGOLD (2000)

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Edward WATSON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Paul D. RHEINGOLD, Defendant-Respondent.

Decided: March 02, 2000

NARDELLI, J.P., TOM, LERNER, RUBIN and FRIEDMAN, JJ.

Cheryl Riess-Curtis, for Plaintiff-Appellant. David A. Boyar, for Defendant-Respondent.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Paula Omansky, J.), entered April 27, 1999, dismissing the complaint, and bringing up for review an order which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint on the ground of collateral estoppel, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The complaint alleging legal malpractice was properly dismissed on the ground that a judgment in another action rejecting plaintiff's claim for disability payments upon a finding that his injury was caused by a prexisting medical condition necessarily precludes a finding in this action that but for defendant's negligence the jury in the underlying action would have found that the same injury was caused by plaintiff's fall over a negligently placed waste paper basket. We note in particular the decision of the appellate court in the other action affirming the trial court's finding that “even if appellant's allegation of falling was true, it was not related in any manner to his disability” (Watson v. American Home Assur. Co., 454 Pa.Super. 293, 304, 685 A.2d 194, 199, lv. denied 549 Pa. 704, 700 A.2d 443).

MEMORANDUM DECISION.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

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.

Explore the Network