NA KERSON CO., INC. v. Shayne
N. A. Kerson Company, Inc., Et Al., Appellants, v. Shayne, Dachs, Weiss, Kolbrenner, Levy and Moe Levine, Individually and as Partners, Et Al., Respondents
Opinion
OPINION OF THE COURT Memorandum.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, without costs, for reasons stated in the concurring memorandum of Mr. Justice Joseph A. Suozzi.
We would add only that plaintiffs proof, taken in its most favorable light, fails to establish a prima facie case of legal malpractice or fraud in connection with the execution of the stipulation of settlement of the prior action. Other than evidence of withdrawal of the second affirmative defense, the record is barren of any evidence that said defense would have altered the result of the prior action.
Chief Judge Breitel and Judges Jasen, Gabrielli, Jones, Fuchsberg and Cooke concur; Judge Wachtler taking no part.
Order affirmed, without costs, in a memorandum.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 3 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(General release executed by plaintiff in underlying action does not preclude him from bringing subsequent legal malpractice action.)
-
(affirming for reasons stated in concui-rence of Suozzi, J.)
Cited by 52 cases
View all citing references →- U.S. Courts of Appeals2
- Federal District Courts5
- Bankruptcy Courts1
- State Highest Courts7
- State Appellate Courts32
- State Trial Courts4
- State Specialty Courts1
Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.