Starr Associates LLP, New York (David William Tyler of counsel), for appellant.

Claude Castro, respondent pro se.

Law Office of D. Paul Martin PLLC, New York (D. Paul Martin of counsel), for Claude Castro & Associates Pllc, respondent.

Renwick, J.P., Kapnick, Mazzarelli, Shulman, Pitt, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Paul A. Goetz, J.), entered March 25, 2021, which granted defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint with prejudice, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The court correctly dismissed plaintiff's Judiciary Law § 487 claim with prejudice where plaintiff failed to allege the elements of a cause of action under the statute, i.e., intentional deceit and damages proximately caused by the deceit (see Judiciary Law § 487 ; Facebook, Inc. v. DLA Piper LLP [US], 134 A.D.3d 610, 615, 23 N.Y.S.3d 173 [1st Dept. 2015], lv denied 28 N.Y.3d 903, 2016 WL 4820902 [2016] ; see also Shawe v. Elting, 161 A.D.3d 585, 77 N.Y.S.3d 400 [1st Dept. 2018], lv denied 32 N.Y.3d 907, 2018 WL 5076046 [2018] ). Plaintiff's conclusory allegations do not support a showing of "egregious conduct or a chronic and extreme pattern of behavior" on the part of defendant attorney that caused damages to plaintiff ( Facebook, 134 A.D.3d at 615, 23 N.Y.S.3d 173 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see also Savitt v. Greenberg Traurig, LLP, 126 A.D.3d 506, 507, 5 N.Y.S.3d 415 [1st Dept. 2015] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Specifically, the allegations do not amount to acts of deceit, as defendant attorney's statements, which consist mainly of simple advocacy, do not give rise to an inference that defendant acted with intent to deceive (see Seldon v. Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP, 116 A.D.3d 490, 984 N.Y.S.2d 23 [1st Dept. 2014], lv denied 25 N.Y.3d 985, 9 N.Y.S.3d 178, 31 N.E.3d 595 [2015] ; see also Facebook at 615, 23 N.Y.S.3d 173 ).

We decline to grant defendants' request for sanctions pursuant to 22 NYCRR 130–1.1.