X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
http://nycourts.law.com/CourtDocumentViewer.asp?view=Document&docID=46411 Justice Lehner IN A LEGAL malpractice action, plaintiff charged that representations were made by a member of defendant law firm that former Governor Mario Cuomo would communicate with Court of Appeals judges in connection with his pending application for leave to appeal the denial of a probate challenge by which he sought return of artwork allegedly converted in 1974 by his now deceased parents. The court granted the law firm’s dismissal motion, concluding that under the three-year limitations period for replevin and conversion, the alleged malpractice occurred in 1977. Because a 1997 action in which the firm represented plaintiff was not related to plaintiff’s instant claim, the statute of limitations was not tolled by continuous representation. Citing Disciplinary Rule 7-110 and City of New York v. 17 Vista Associates, the court ruled plaintiff’s action for damages based on the firm’s alleged breach of an agreement for a member of the firm to violate the disciplinary rules was “clearly unenforceable.”

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.