A trial court was correct to dismiss a legal malpractice claim brought by an investor who lost $2.1 million in a Ponzi scheme, the Appellate Division, First Department, ruled Thursday.
A unanimous panel said in Rothman v. McLaughlin & Stern, 104230/10, that defendants Martin Friedman and the firm at which he was a partner, McLaughlin & Stern, “established their entitlement to judgment as a matter of law by submitting proof that plaintiff, an experienced investor, understood that the retainer agreement excluded due diligence from the scope of representation.”
