Global Business Institute, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LLP (2011)

_

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Doris Ling-Cohan, J.), entered January 14, 2010, which, in an action alleging legal malpractice, denied plaintiff's motion for leave to amend the complaint to assert additional allegations of malpractice and to increase the ad damnum clause, and to transfer the action back from the Civil Court of the City of New York to Supreme Court, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion granted.

The motion court improvidently exercised its discretion in denying plaintiff's motion.   Leave to amend the pleadings is freely granted, absent prejudice (see Mandel, Resnik & Kaiser, P.C. v E.I. Elecs., Inc., 41 AD3d 386, 388 [2007];  see also Loomis v Civetta Corinno Constr.   Corp., 54 N.Y.2d 18 [1981] ), and plaintiff has stated, at this juncture, a cognizable claim against defendant law firm for failure to sufficiently advise it of the consequences of the tax escalation clause in the lease it eventually executed with its landlord several months after retaining defendant (see Escape Airports (USA), Inc. v Kent, Beatty & Gordon, LLP, 79 AD3d 437 [2010] ).   Furthermore, in view of the foregoing and the additional damages sought, the matter should be transferred to Supreme Court (see Firequench, Inc. v. Kaplan, 256 A.D.2d 213 [1998] ).

THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER

OF THE SUPREME COURT, APPELLATE DIVISION, FIRST DEPARTMENT.

_

CLERK