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.
Daniel W. ASHER, appellant, v. Lark J. SHLIMBAUM, et al., respondents.
In an action to recover damages for legal malpractice, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Weber, J.), dated May 3, 2006, which granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to CPLR 3211.
ORDERED that the order is affirmed, with costs.
The Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint alleging legal malpractice. The plaintiff's underlying action was commenced to enforce an alleged oral contract between himself and his sister and brother-in-law to convey certain real property from them to him. By order dated September 30, 2004, the Supreme Court found that the plaintiff's actions in connection with the acquisition and maintenance of the property were not unequivocally referable to the alleged contract (see General Obligations Law § 5-703[4] ), and therefore the alleged contract was barred by the statute of frauds and was unenforceable (see General Obligations Law § 5-703[3] ). This was sufficient to show that the plaintiff could not establish that he would have succeeded in the underlying action but for the defendants' failure to plead other legal theories in connection with the underlying action (see Leder v. Spiegel, 9 N.Y.3d 836, 840 N.Y.S.2d 888, 872 N.E.2d 1194). Accordingly, the Supreme Court properly granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint (see L & S Motors, Inc., d/b/a Huntington Honda v. Broadview Networks, Inc., 25 A.D.3d 767, 808 N.Y.S.2d 777; Dann v. King Assoc., LLC, 303 A.D.2d 539, 756 N.Y.S.2d 478; Roth v. Goldman, 254 A.D.2d 405, 679 N.Y.S.2d 92).
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: November 27, 2007
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)