Opinion
March 18, 1999
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Sheila Abdus-Salaam, J.).
Defendants-appellants' motion for summary judgment should have been granted because plaintiff's assertions in opposition to summary judgment failed to raise a triable issue of material fact ( Zuckerman v. City of New York, 49 N.Y.2d 557, 562). The record shows that each of plaintiff's assertions was speculative or unsubstantiated, or referred to an inconsequential legal error ( see, Luniewski v. Zeitlin, 188 A.D.2d 642, 643; Geraci v. Bausman, Greene Kunkis, 171 A.D.2d 454, appeal dismissed 78 N.Y.2d 907). In any case, he failed to establish, prima facie, that his attorney was negligent, that the negligence was the proximate cause of the loss allegedly sustained, that he sustained actual damages, and that but for the alleged negligence and malpractice of his attorney, he could have achieved a better result in the underlying action ( Geraci v. Bauman, Greene Kunkis, supra; Luniewski v. Zeitlin, supra).
Concur — Williams, J. P., Wallach, Andrias and Saxe, JJ.