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.
Harry STEINER, appellant, v. LAZZARO & GREGORY, P.C., et al., respondents.
In an action to recover damages for legal malpractice and breach of contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jackson, J.), dated January 20, 1999, which, upon converting the defendants' motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to one for summary judgment, granted the defendants summary judgment dismissing the complaint.
ORDERED that the order is modified by deleting the provision thereof granting the defendants summary judgment and substituting therefor a provision granting the defendants' motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.
The trial court erred when it converted the defendants' motion pursuant to CPLR 3211(a)(7) to one for summary judgment, since it failed to give notice to the parties (see, CPLR 3211[c]; Rovello v. Orofino Realty Co., 40 N.Y.2d 633, 635, 389 N.Y.S.2d 314, 357 N.E.2d 970). Nevertheless, the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action should have been granted. Where, as here, evidentiary material has been considered, the court must determine whether the proponent of the pleading has a cause of action, not whether he or she has stated one (see, Guggenheimer v. Ginzburg, 43 N.Y.2d 268, 275, 401 N.Y.S.2d 182, 372 N.E.2d 17). When read in conjunction with the evidentiary record, the plaintiff's amended complaint fails to allege any material facts giving rise to a cognizable claim for legal malpractice (see, Kantrowitz & Goldhamer, P.C. v. Geller, 265 A.D.2d 529, 697 N.Y.S.2d 137; Choi v. Dworkin, 230 A.D.2d 780, 782, 646 N.Y.S.2d 531). Further, the plaintiff's second cause of action alleging a breach of contract must be dismissed since the terms of the retainer agreement are not set out in the complaint and, in any event, the retainer agreement does not promise a specific result (see, Krouner v. Koplovitz, 175 A.D.2d 531, 572 N.Y.S.2d 959).
MEMORANDUM BY THE COURT.
Thank you for your feedback!
A free source of state and federal court opinions, state laws, and the United States Code. For more information about the legal concepts addressed by these cases and statutes visit FindLaw's Learn About the Law.
Decided: April 17, 2000
Court: Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second 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)