Summary
affirming an order barring a party from initiating further litigation, and making reference to "abuse of the judicial process," but making no finding regarding tort liability for abuse of process
Summary of this case from Manhattan Enter. v. HigginsOpinion
No. 100.
March 19, 2009.
Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Debra A. James, J.), entered July 24, 2007, in an action for legal malpractice, dismissing the complaint pursuant to an order, which, inter alia, granted defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint and enjoined plaintiff from initiating any further litigation without prior approval of the administrative judge of the court in which she seeks to bring a further motion or future action, unanimously affirmed, with costs.
Eleanor Capogrosso, New York, appellant pro se.
Tina Kansas, New York, respondent pro se.
Before: Tom, J.P., Saxe, Sweeny, Acosta and Freedman, JJ.
Plaintiff's action for legal malpractice is barred by the statute of limitations, which began to run no later than the day the order dismissing her underlying medical malpractice action was entered (see McCoy v Feinman, 99 NY2d 295, 298). The injunction barring plaintiff from initiating further litigation without prior court approval was justified in light of the evidence of plaintiff's repeated abuse of the judicial process and her penchant for vexatious conduct ( Sassower v Signorelli, 99 AD2d 358).
We have considered plaintiff's remaining contentions, including that the motion to dismiss was jurisdictionally defective, and find them unavailing.
[ See 2007 NY Slip Op 32042(U).]