COHEN v. Steven Barshov, Defendant. (2018)

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Jennifer G. Schecter, J.), entered October 30, 2017, which, to the extent appealed from, denied defendant Sive, Paget & Riesel, P.C.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the cause of action for legal malpractice as against it, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Defendant argues that its failure to advise plaintiffs of the condition in their insurance policy requiring them to provide the insurance company with prompt notice of their claim was not the proximate cause of plaintiffs' damages.  Defendant contends that, by the time plaintiffs retained it as counsel, more than a month had passed since they had learned of the damage implicating the policy, and thus the insurance company would have declined coverage anyway, based on plaintiffs' unreasonably delayed notice (see Young Israel Co–Op. City v. Guideone Mut. Ins. Co., 52 A.D.3d 245, 859 N.Y.S.2d 171 [1st Dept. 2008]; Pandora Indus. v. St. Paul Surplus Lines Ins. Co., 188 A.D.2d 277, 590 N.Y.S.2d 471 [1st Dept. 1992] ).  However, the record does not conclusively demonstrate a delay of that length; issues of fact exist as to when the notification obligation was triggered.

Defendant's contention that the legal malpractice claim should be dismissed as speculative is without merit.